Literature DB >> 26119561

Does Stepwise Voltage Ramping Protect the Kidney from Injury During Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy? Results of a Prospective Randomized Trial.

Veronika Skuginna1, Daniel P Nguyen1, Roland Seiler1, Bernhard Kiss1, George N Thalmann1, Beat Roth2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Renal damage is more frequent with new-generation lithotripters. However, animal studies suggest that voltage ramping minimizes the risk of complications following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). In the clinical setting, the optimal voltage strategy remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether stepwise voltage ramping can protect the kidney from damage during SWL. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 418 patients with solitary or multiple unilateral kidney stones were randomized to receive SWL using a Modulith SLX-F2 lithotripter with either stepwise voltage ramping (n=213) or a fixed maximal voltage (n=205). INTERVENTION: SWL. OUTCOMES MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was sonographic evidence of renal hematomas. Secondary outcomes included levels of urinary markers of renal damage, stone disintegration, stone-free rate, and rates of secondary interventions within 3 mo of SWL. Descriptive statistics were used to compare clinical outcomes between the two groups. A logistic regression model was generated to assess predictors of hematomas. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Significantly fewer hematomas occurred in the ramping group(12/213, 5.6%) than in the fixed group (27/205, 13%; p=0.008). There was some evidence that the fixed group had higher urinary β2-microglobulin levels after SWL compared to the ramping group (p=0.06). Urinary microalbumin levels, stone disintegration, stone-free rate, and rates of secondary interventions did not significantly differ between the groups. The logistic regression model showed a significantly higher risk of renal hematomas in older patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.05; p=0.04). Stepwise voltage ramping was associated with a lower risk of hematomas (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.80; p=0.01). The study was limited by the use of ultrasound to detect hematomas.
CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective randomized study, stepwise voltage ramping during SWL was associated with a lower risk of renal damage compared to a fixed maximal voltage without compromising treatment effectiveness. PATIENT
SUMMARY: Lithotripsy is a noninvasive technique for urinary stone disintegration using ultrasonic energy. In this study, two voltage strategies are compared. The results show that a progressive increase in voltage during lithotripsy decreases the risk of renal hematomas while maintaining excellent outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN95762080.
Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy; Randomized trial; Renal damage; Voltage ramping

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26119561     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  17 in total

Review 1.  Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy: Current Perspectives and Future Directions.

Authors:  Andrew C Lawler; Eric M Ghiraldi; Carmen Tong; Justin I Friedlander
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Comparison of escalating, constant, and reduction energy output in ESWL for renal stones: multi-arm prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Danny M Rabah; Mohamed S Mabrouki; Karim H Farhat; Mohamed A Seida; Mostafa A Arafa; Riyadh F Talic
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Energy output modalities of shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of urinary stones: escalating or fixed voltage? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zihao He; Tuo Deng; Shanfeng Yin; Zihao Xu; Haifeng Duan; Yeda Chen; Xiaolu Duan; Guohua Zeng
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Optimisation of shock wave lithotripsy: a systematic review of technical aspects to improve outcomes.

Authors:  Su-Min Lee; Neil Collin; Helen Wiseman; Joe Philip
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2019-09

5.  Using 300 Pretreatment Shock Waves in a Voltage Ramping Protocol Can Significantly Reduce Tissue Injury During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy.

Authors:  Bret A Connors; Andrew P Evan; Rajash K Handa; Philip M Blomgren; Cynthia D Johnson; Ziyue Liu; James E Lingeman
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  Hospital admission for treatment of complications after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones: a study of risk factors.

Authors:  Ahmed R El-Nahas; Diaa-Eldin Taha; Mohamed M Elsaadany; Mohamed H Zahran; Mohamed Hassan; Khaled Z Sheir
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2017-05-29       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 7.  Clinical application of the therapeutic ultrasound in urologic disease: Part II of therapeutic ultrasound in urology.

Authors:  Minh-Tung Do; Tam Hoai Ly; Min Joo Choi; Sung Yong Cho
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2022-05-16

8.  A low or high BMI is a risk factor for renal hematoma after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for kidney stones.

Authors:  Fabio Nussberger; Beat Roth; Tobias Metzger; Bernhard Kiss; George N Thalmann; Roland Seiler
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 3.436

9.  Renal Protection Phenomenon Observed in a Porcine Model After Electromagnetic Lithotripsy Using a Treatment Pause.

Authors:  Bret A Connors; Tony Gardner; Ziyue Liu; James E Lingeman; James C Williams
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 2.942

10.  Outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones according to ESWL intensity.

Authors:  Ji Hyung Yoon; Sejun Park; Seong Cheol Kim; Sungchan Park; Kyung Hyun Moon; Sang Hyeon Cheon; Taekmin Kwon
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.