Literature DB >> 10475348

Does the rate of extracorporeal shock wave delivery affect stone fragmentation?

A Greenstein1, H Matzkin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of the rate of shock wave delivery on stone fragmentation, because the optimal rate of shock wave administration has not yet been established.
METHODS: Standard phantom, ball-shaped, ceramic stones were placed in a net-like basket with a hole size of 2.2 mm and immersed in a specially designed water bath coupled with the Econolith 2000 lithotripter. One hundred eighteen stones (mean diameter 9.5 mm) were used. Shock waves were delivered at rates of 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 shocks/min and at intensities of 15, 20, and 22.5 kV (electrohydraulic). The number of shocks required for complete fragmentation, determined by all fragmented particles falling through the basket holes, was recorded.
RESULTS: The most effective (fewer shocks needed for complete stone fragmentation) rate of shock wave delivery was 60 shocks/min. A statistically significant difference was demonstrated between the mean number of shocks required for complete stone fragmentation at the rate of 60 shocks/min and faster rates at all energy levels (P <0.01) but not between the rate of 60 shocks/min and the rate of 30 shocks/min at all energy levels.
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of shock wave administration during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy seems to influence stone disintegration. We demonstrated that extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is most effective when waves are delivered at 60 shocks/min.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10475348     DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00176-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  25 in total

1.  Best of the AUA Annual Meeting: Highlights From the 2010 American Urological Association Meeting, May 29-June 3, 2010, San Francisco, CA.

Authors:  J Curtis Nickel; Akira Furuta; Michael B Chancellor; Claus G Roehrborn; Dean G Assimos; Ellen Shapiro; Michael K Brawer
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2010

2.  Adjuncts to improve outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Peter L Steinberg; Steven Williams; David M Hoenig
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Bubbles with shock waves and ultrasound: a review.

Authors:  Siew-Wan Ohl; Evert Klaseboer; Boo Cheong Khoo
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 3.906

4.  Why stones break better at slow shockwave rates than at fast rates: in vitro study with a research electrohydraulic lithotripter.

Authors:  Yuri A Pishchalnikov; James A McAteer; James C Williams; Irina V Pishchalnikova; R Jason Vonderhaar
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Acoustic bubble removal to enhance SWL efficacy at high shock rate: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Alexander P Duryea; William W Roberts; Charles A Cain; Hedieh A Tamaddoni; Timothy L Hall
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2013-10-04       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  Removal of residual nuclei following a cavitation event using low-amplitude ultrasound.

Authors:  Alexander P Duryea; Charles A Cain; Hedieh A Tamaddoni; William W Roberts; Timothy L Hall
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.725

7.  Enhanced High-Rate Shockwave Lithotripsy Stone Comminution in an In Vivo Porcine Model Using Acoustic Bubble Coalescence.

Authors:  Hedieh Alavi Tamaddoni; William W Roberts; Alexander P Duryea; Charles A Cain; Timothy L Hall
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.942

8.  Comparison of intermediate- and low-frequency shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric kidney stones.

Authors:  Onur Kaygısız; Hakan Kılıçarslan; Ahmet Mert; Burhan Coşkun; Yakup Kordan
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-07-29       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Turbulent water coupling in shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Jaclyn Lautz; Georgy Sankin; Pei Zhong
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Does treatment rate impact the efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for kidney or ureteral stones?

Authors:  K Muruganandham; Aneesh Srivastava
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.