Bret A Connors1, Andrew P Evan2, Philip M Blomgren2, Ryan S Hsi3, Jonathan D Harper3, Mathew D Sorensen3, Yak-Nam Wang4, Julianna C Simon4, Marla Paun4, Frank Starr4, Bryan W Cunitz4, Michael R Bailey4, James E Lingeman5. 1. Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. Electronic address: bconnors@iupui.edu. 2. Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. 3. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 4. Center for Industrial and Medical Ultrasound, Applied Physics Laboratory, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 5. Methodist Hospital Institute for Kidney Stone Disease, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Focused ultrasonic propulsion is a new noninvasive technique designed to move kidney stones and stone fragments out of the urinary collecting system. However, to our knowledge the extent of tissue injury associated with this technique is not known. We quantitated the amount of tissue injury produced by focused ultrasonic propulsion under simulated clinical treatment conditions and under conditions of higher power or continuous duty cycles. We compared those results to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A human calcium oxalate monohydrate stone and/or nickel beads were implanted by ureteroscopy in 3 kidneys of live pigs weighing 45 to 55 kg and repositioned using focused ultrasonic propulsion. Additional pig kidneys were exposed to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy level pulse intensity or continuous ultrasound exposure 10 minutes in duration using an ultrasound probe transcutaneously or on the kidney. These kidneys were compared to 6 treated with an unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotripter (Dornier Medical Systems, Kennesaw, Georgia) using 2,400 shocks at 120 shock waves per minute and 24 kV. Histological analysis was performed to assess the volume of hemorrhagic tissue injury created by each technique according to the percent of functional renal volume. RESULTS: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy produced a mean ± SEM lesion of 1.56% ± 0.45% of functional renal volume. Ultrasonic propulsion produced no detectable lesion with simulated clinical treatment. A lesion of 0.46% ± 0.37% or 1.15% ± 0.49% of functional renal volume was produced when excessive treatment parameters were used with the ultrasound probe placed on the kidney. CONCLUSIONS: Focused ultrasonic propulsion produced no detectable morphological injury to the renal parenchyma when using clinical treatment parameters but produced injury comparable in size to that of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy when using excessive treatment parameters.
PURPOSE: Focused ultrasonic propulsion is a new noninvasive technique designed to move kidney stones and stone fragments out of the urinary collecting system. However, to our knowledge the extent of tissue injury associated with this technique is not known. We quantitated the amount of tissue injury produced by focused ultrasonic propulsion under simulated clinical treatment conditions and under conditions of higher power or continuous duty cycles. We compared those results to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A humancalcium oxalate monohydrate stone and/or nickel beads were implanted by ureteroscopy in 3 kidneys of live pigs weighing 45 to 55 kg and repositioned using focused ultrasonic propulsion. Additional pig kidneys were exposed to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy level pulse intensity or continuous ultrasound exposure 10 minutes in duration using an ultrasound probe transcutaneously or on the kidney. These kidneys were compared to 6 treated with an unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotripter (Dornier Medical Systems, Kennesaw, Georgia) using 2,400 shocks at 120 shock waves per minute and 24 kV. Histological analysis was performed to assess the volume of hemorrhagic tissue injury created by each technique according to the percent of functional renal volume. RESULTS: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy produced a mean ± SEM lesion of 1.56% ± 0.45% of functional renal volume. Ultrasonic propulsion produced no detectable lesion with simulated clinical treatment. A lesion of 0.46% ± 0.37% or 1.15% ± 0.49% of functional renal volume was produced when excessive treatment parameters were used with the ultrasound probe placed on the kidney. CONCLUSIONS: Focused ultrasonic propulsion produced no detectable morphological injury to the renal parenchyma when using clinical treatment parameters but produced injury comparable in size to that of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy when using excessive treatment parameters.
Authors: Ryan F Paterson; Eric Barret; Tibério M Siqueira; Thomas A Gardner; Jahangir Tavakkoli; Victor V Rao; Narendra T Sanghvi; Liang Cheng; Arieh L Shalhav Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Anup Shah; Neil R Owen; Wei Lu; Bryan W Cunitz; Peter J Kaczkowski; Jonathan D Harper; Michael R Bailey; Lawrence A Crum Journal: Urol Res Date: 2010-10-22
Authors: Rajash K Handa; James A McAteer; Lynn R Willis; Yuri A Pishchalnikov; Bret A Connors; Jun Ying; James E Lingeman; Andrew P Evan Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-02-19 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Anup Shah; Jonathan D Harper; Bryan W Cunitz; Yak-Nam Wang; Marla Paun; Julianna C Simon; Wei Lu; Peter J Kaczkowski; Michael R Bailey Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jonathan D Harper; Mathew D Sorensen; Bryan W Cunitz; Yak-Nam Wang; Julianna C Simon; Frank Starr; Marla Paun; Barbrina Dunmire; H Denny Liggitt; Andrew P Evan; James A McAteer; Ryan S Hsi; Michael R Bailey Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Stephen B Solomon; Theresa L Nicol; David Y Chan; Todd Fjield; Nathaniel Fried; Louis R Kavoussi Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Ryan S Hsi; Barbrina Dunmire; Bryan W Cunitz; Xuemei He; Mathew D Sorensen; Jonathan D Harper; Michael R Bailey; Thomas S Lendvay Journal: J Endourol Date: 2014-01-02 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Karmon M Janssen; Timothy C Brand; Bryan W Cunitz; Yak-Nam Wang; Julianna C Simon; Frank Starr; H Denny Liggitt; Jeff Thiel; Mathew D Sorensen; Jonathan D Harper; Michael R Bailey; Barbrina Dunmire Journal: J Endourol Date: 2017-06-26 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Jessica C Dai; Mathew D Sorensen; Helena C Chang; Patrick C Samson; Barbrina Dunmire; Bryan W Cunitz; Jeff Thiel; Ziyue Liu; Michael R Bailey; Jonathan D Harper Journal: J Endourol Date: 2019-09-25 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Jonathan D Harper; Bryan W Cunitz; Barbrina Dunmire; Franklin C Lee; Mathew D Sorensen; Ryan S Hsi; Jeff Thiel; Hunter Wessells; James E Lingeman; Michael R Bailey Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-10-30 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jonathan D Harper; Barbrina Dunmire; Yak-Nam Wang; Julianna C Simon; Denny Liggitt; Marla Paun; Bryan W Cunitz; Frank Starr; Michael R Bailey; Kristina L Penniston; Franklin C Lee; Ryan S Hsi; Mathew D Sorensen Journal: Urology Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Bryan W Cunitz; Barbrina Dunmire; Michael R Bailey Journal: IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control Date: 2017-10-02 Impact factor: 2.725
Authors: Karmon M Janssen; Timothy C Brand; Michael R Bailey; Bryan W Cunitz; Jonathan D Harper; Mathew D Sorensen; Barbrina Dunmire Journal: Urology Date: 2017-09-28 Impact factor: 2.649