Literature DB >> 10491712

Comparison of electrohydraulic lithotripters with rigid and pressure-release ellipsoidal reflectors. I. Acoustic fields.

M R Bailey1, D T Blackstock, R O Cleveland, L A Crum.   

Abstract

The most common lithotripter, a Dornier HM-3, utilizes an underwater spark to generate an acoustic pulse and a rigid ellipsoidal reflector to focus the pulse on the kidney stone to be comminuted. The pulse measured in water with a PVDF membrane hydrophone at the external focus of the ellipsoid was a 1-microsecond positive-pressure spike followed by a 3-microsecond negative-pressure trough. When we replaced the rigid reflector in our experimental lithotripter with a pressure-release reflector, the pulse was a 1.6-microsecond trough followed by a 0.6-microsecond positive spike. The waveforms are nearly time inverses (i.e., their spikes and troughs are reversed). The frequency spectra, the maximum peak positive pressures P+ (42 MPa, rigid and 43 MPa, pressure-release), and the maximum peak negative pressures P- (-12 MPa and -14 MPa) are comparable. The maximum P- occurred 20 mm closer to the reflector than did the maximum P+, for both reflectors. However, the spatial maxima of the peak pressures (P+ and P-) produced by the pressure-release reflector were located 20 mm nearer to the reflector than those produced by the rigid reflector. Qualitative explanation of the waveforms and the location of pressure maxima as well as comparison to previous theoretical and experimental results is given. The alternate waveform produced by the pressure-release reflector may be a tool in determining the role of cavitation in lithotripsy because cavitation is highly sensitive to waveform.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 10491712     DOI: 10.1121/1.423758

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  10 in total

Review 1.  Section 8--clinical relevance. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 2.  Section 6--mechanical bioeffects in the presence of gas-carrier ultrasound contrast agents. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 3.  Section 7--discussion of the mechanical index and other exposure parameters. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 4.  Section 4--bioeffects in tissues with gas bodies. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.153

5.  Reduction of bubble cavitation by modifying the diffraction wave from a lithotripter aperture.

Authors:  Yufeng Zhou
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-03-26       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 6.  Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis for stroke therapy: better thrombus break-up with bubbles.

Authors:  Kathryn E Hitchcock; Christy K Holland
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 7.914

7.  Evaluation of an experimental electrohydraulic discharge device for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: Pressure field of sparker array.

Authors:  Guangyan Li; Bret A Connors; Ray B Schaefer; John J Gallagher; Andrew P Evan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Simulation of the effects of cavitation and anatomy in the shock path of model lithotripters.

Authors:  Jeff Krimmel; Tim Colonius; Michel Tanguay
Journal:  Urol Res       Date:  2010-11-10

Review 9.  Ultrasound-mediated drug delivery for cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Jonathan T Sutton; Kevin J Haworth; Gail Pyne-Geithman; Christy K Holland
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Deliv       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 6.648

10.  Customization of the acoustic field produced by a piezoelectric array through interelement delays.

Authors:  Parag V Chitnis; Paul E Barbone; Robin O Cleveland
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.482

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.