Comparative evaluation of tissue damage induced by ultrasound and impact dual-mode endoscopic lithotripsy versus conventional single-mode ultrasound lithotripsy

Single-Center Experience with Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy for Kidney Stones

INTRODUCTION

PCNL remains the gold standard for larger kidney stones. Reducing the operating time of PCNL and its complication rate seems to be the next logical step in optimizing this classical technique. To achieve these objectives, some new methods of lithotripsy emerge. We present the data of a single, high-volume, academic center with combined ultrasonic and ballistic lithotripsy in PCNL using the Swiss LithoClast^® Trilogy device.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We designed a prospective, randomized study including patients who underwent PCNL or miniPerc with lithotripsy using the new EMS Lithoclast Trilogy or EMS Lithoclast Master. The procedure was carried out with all patients in prone position, by the same surgeon. The working channel size was 24 Fr-15.9 Fr. We evaluated the stones' features, operative time, fragmentation time, complications, stone clearance rate and stone-free rate.

RESULTS

Our study included 59 patients, 38 females and 31 males, of an average age of 54.5 years old. The Trilogy group included 28 patients and the comparator included 31 patients. Urine culture was positive in seven cases which required seven days of antibiotics. The mean stone diameter was 35.6 mm with a mean Hounsfield unit (HU) of 710.1. The average number of stones was 2.08 (6 complete staghorn stones and 12 partial staghorn stones). A total of 13 patients presented a JJ stent (46.4%). We found a very significant difference in all the parameters favoring the Trilogy device. The most important result in our opinion is the probe active time, which was almost six times shorter in the Trilogy group. The stone clearance rate was about double in the Trilogy group, leading to shorter overall and intra-renal operating times. The overall complication rate was 17.9% in the Trilogy group and 23% in the Lithoclast Master group. The mean hemoglobin drop was 2.1 g/dL with a mean creatinine rise of 0.26 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

Swiss LithoClast^® Trilogy, a device combining ultrasonic and ballistic energy, is a safe and efficient method of lithotripsy for PCNL, proving statistically significant benefits over its predecesor. It can achieve the goal of reducing complication rates and operative times for PCNL.

Assessment of single-probe dual-energy lithotripters in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical and clinical studies

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of single-probe dual-energy (SPDE) lithotripters in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Embase databases until July 2022 for any preclinical or clinical studies, exploring the safety and efficacy of different SPDE lithotripters in patients undergoing PCNL. We performed a meta-analysis to compare stone-free rate, bleeding, or other complications and mean operative time between SPDE lithotripters and other lithotripters (PROSPERO: CRD42021285631).

RESULTS

We included 16 studies (six preclinical, seven observational and three randomized with 625 participants) in the systematic review and four in the meta-analysis. Preclinical studies suggest that SPDE lithotripters are safe and effective for the management of renal stones. Among clinical studies, four studies assessed Trilogy with no comparative arm, two compared Trilogy or ShockPulse with a dual-probe dual-energy lithotripter, two compared Trilogy with a laser, one compared ShockPulse with a pneumatic lithotripter, and one directly compared Trilogy with ShockPulse. Comparing SPDE lithotripters to other lithotripters, no significant differences were demonstrated in stone free rate (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.53-2.38, I² = 0%), postoperative blood transfusion (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.34-5.19, I² = 0%), embolization (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.02-12.06), operative time (WMD: 2.82 min, 95% CI -7.31-12.95, I² = 78%) and postoperative complications based on the Clavien-Dindo classification.

CONCLUSIONS

SPDE lithotripters represent a promising treatment modality for patients requiring PCNL. Despite the initial encouraging findings of preclinical and isolated clinical studies, it seems that Trilogy or ShockPulse provide similar efficiency compared to older generation devices.

Clearance of Metal Particles After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with Trilogy Lithotripter

Purpose: To evaluate the clearance of metal particles produced and released in the pelvicaliceal system (PCS) during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with the use of the Swiss Lithoclast^® Trilogy dual-energy (EMS Urology, Nyon, Switzerland) lithotripter. Methods: An experimental in vivo study and a clinical investigation of case series were conducted. An in vivo porcine model with two pigs for lithotripsy (after inserting artificial stones into the collecting system) and two pigs for submucosal injection of metal particles (provided by the manufacturer of Trilogy) was conducted. Porcine kidney histology analysis for metal leftovers was conducted immediately or 2 weeks after the surgery. A prospective observational study design included 10 consecutive patients treated with conventional 30F PCNL or with 22F mini-PCNL technique. Only the patients with the confirmed metal particles in the PCS during the initial PCNL and the need for additional retrograde intrarenal surgery over a period of 2-4 weeks were selected. The presence of metal particles was evaluated during the second endoscopic surgery. Results: The generated metal particles during PCNL and the submucosally injected particles were not found macroscopically 2 weeks postoperatively in porcine models. No pathologic changes such as foreign body granuloma or inflammation were found. Similarly, no metal particles were observed during the second look endoscopy (n = 10). Conclusion: Metal particles observed endoscopically using the Trilogy lithotripter are cleared with no pathologic evidence of tissue damage from the metal particles 2 weeks after the procedure. Thus, the intraoperative release of any particle by the Trilogy lithotripter should not raise any safety concerns.

Lithotripsy devices for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) - new developments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is the mainstay of surgery for renal calculi>2 cm or complex multiple calculi and is a technique that has been around since 1976. We review recent literature surrounding novel lithotripsy devices and technology used in PNL.

RECENT FINDINGS

At present, the Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser is widely accepted as the gold standard laser lithotripsy for PNL. SwissLithoClast Trilogy offers a range of probes with a trifecta of electromagnetic, ultrasonic energy with surgeon-controlled suction. The Olympus Shockpulse-SE is a similar lithotripter that relies on continuous ultrasonic energy with pulsed ballistic energy to break stones. Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) offers an alternative laser energy source to the Holmium laser, which has been shown to be very effective at producing small stone fragments and dust. The Moses technology is another addition in a long list of improvements to the Ho:YAG laser, forming vaporization bubble through which more effective energy can be applied to stones.

SUMMARY

Trilogy, Shockpulse, TFL and Moses pulse modulation technology for the Holmium laser all provide improvements compared with older lithotripsy devices. In particular, they convey a safer, efficient and more effective way to manage and clear stones.

Multi-Institutional Prospective Randomized Control Trial of Novel Intracorporeal Lithotripters: ShockPulse-SE vs Trilogy Trial

Introduction: Currently, there are multiple intracorporeal lithotripters available for use in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of two novel lithotripters: Trilogy and ShockPulse-SE. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective multi-institutional randomized trial comparing outcomes of PCNL using two novel lithotripters between February 2019 and June 2020. The study assessed objective measures of stone clearance time, stone clearance rate, device malfunction, stone-free rates, and complications. Device assessment was provided through immediate postoperative survey by primary surgeons. Results: There were 100 standard PCNLs completed using either a Trilogy or ShockPulse-SE lithotrite. Using quantitative Stone Analysis Software to estimate stone volume, the mean stone volume was calculated at 4.18 ± 4.79 and 3.86 ± 3.43 cm3 for the Trilogy and ShockPulse-SE groups, respectively. Stone clearance rates were found to be 1.22 ± 1.67 and 0.77 ± 0.68 cm3/min for Trilogy vs ShockPulse-SE (p = 0.0542). When comparing Trilogy to ShockPulse-SE in a multivariate analysis, total operative room time (104.4 ± 48.2 minutes vs 121.1 ± 59.2 minutes p = 0.126), rates of secondary procedures (17.65% vs 40.81%, p = 0.005), and device malfunctions (1.96% vs 34.69%, p < 0.001) were less, respectively. There was no difference in final stone-free rates between devices. Conclusion: Both the Trilogy and ShockPulse-SE lithotripters are highly efficient at removing large renal stones. In this study, we noted differences between the two devices including fewer device malfunctions when Trilogy device was utilized. Clinical Trial ID number: NCT03959683.

Efficacy and safety of the EMS Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy for PCNL: results of the European multicentre prospective study on behalf of European Section of UroTechnology

Purpose

PCNL requires a lithotrite to efficiently break stones, and some devices include active suction to remove the fragments. We set out to determine the efficacy and safety of the Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy, in a prospective European multicentre evaluation and compared it to published stone clearance rates for Trilogy based on surface area (68.9 mm²/min) and using the 3D calculated stone volume (526.7 mm³/min).

Methods

Ten European centres participated in this prospective non-randomized study of Trilogy for PCNL. Objective measures of stone clearance rate, device malfunction, complications and stone-free rates were assessed. Each surgeon subjectively evaluated ergonomic and device effectiveness, on a 1–10 scale (10 = extremely ergonomic/effective) and compared to their usual lithotrite on a 1–10 scale (10 = extremely effective).

Results

One hundred and fifty seven PCNLs using Trilogy were included (53% male, 47% female; mean age 55 years, range 13–84 years). Mean stone clearance rate was 65.55 mm²/min or 945 mm³/min based on calculated 3D volume. Stone-free rate on fluoroscopy screening at the end of the procedure was 83%. Feedback for suction effectiveness was 9.0 with 9.1 for combination and 9.0 for overall effectiveness compared to lithotrite used previously. Ergonomic score was 8.1, the least satisfactory element. Complications included 13 (8.2%) Clavien–Dindo Grade II and 2 (1.3%) Grade III. Probe breakage was seen in 9 (5.7%), none required using a different lithotrite.

Conclusions

We have demonstrated that Trilogy is highly effective at stone removal. From a user perspective, the device was perceived by surgeons to be highly effective overall and compared to the most commonly used previous lithotrite, with an excellent safety profile.

Evaluation of intrarenal pressure stability at different lithotripter suction settings in a porcine kidney model

PURPOSE

Using the Swiss LithoClast^® Trilogy, urinary stones can be fragmented and removed simultaneously by suction at different selectable suction settings. The aim was to evaluate pressure stability at different settings and test stone fragmentation and suction at the optimal settings.

METHODS

In an ex vivo porcine kidney model, we recorded intrarenal pressure levels with different suction levels. Storz^® Nephroscopes MIP-M and MIP-L and Swiss LithoClast^® Trilogy probes were used.

RESULTS

Pressure stabilized at 19 cm H₂O with the MIP-M at 1 m gravity irrigation with no instrument introduced. After inserting the 1.5 mm probe, the pressure dropped to 5 cm H₂O. With a suction setting of 10%, the pressure stabilized at 3 cm H₂O and remained stable for the maximum time of 120 s. After increasing the suction to 20, 30, 40, and 50%, we recorded the pressure drop time to 0 after 22, 14, 11, and 8 s. Using the MIP-L, pressure stabilized at 44 cm H₂O and decreased to 8 cm H₂O after inserting the 3.4 mm probe. With 10% suction, a pressure stabilization was measured at 2 cm H₂O and remained stable for 120 s. At suction levels of 20 and 30%, the pressure drop time to 0 was 6 and 5 s. With a 10% suction, removing stones was efficient, and the kidney's filling volume was maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

When using the LithoClast^® Trilogy, a suction setting of 10% seems to be optimal for the treatment of urinary calculi when applying suction continuously.

Consultation on kidney stones, Copenhagen 2019: lithotripsy in percutaneous nephrolithotomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the balance between existing evidence and expert opinions on the safety and efficacy of new technological improvements in lithotripsy techniques for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

METHODS

A scoping review approach was applied to search literature in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Consensus by key opinion leaders was reached at a 2-day meeting entitled "Consultation on Kidney Stones: Aspects of Intracorporeal Lithotripsy" held in Copenhagen, Denmark, in September 2019.

RESULTS

New-generation dual-mode single-probe lithotripsy devices have shown favourable results compared with use of ballistic or ultrasonic lithotripters only. However, ballistic and ultrasonic lithotripters are also highly effective and safe and have been the backbone of PCNL for many years. Compared with standard PCNL, it seems that mini PCNL is associated with fewer bleeding complications and shorter hospital admissions, but also with longer operating room (OR) time and higher intrarenal pressure. Use of laser lithotripsy combined with suction in mini PCNL is a promising alternative that may improve such PCNL by shortening OR times. Furthermore, supine PCNL is a good alternative, especially in cases with complex renal stones and large proximal ureteric stones; in addition, it facilitates endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS).

CONCLUSION

Recent technological improvements in PCNL techniques are promising, but there is a lack of high-level evidence on safety and efficacy. Different techniques suit different types of stones and patients. The evolution of diverse methods has given urologists the possibility of a personalized stone approach, in other words, the right approach for the right patient.

Comparison of stone elimination capacity and drilling speed of endoscopic clearance lithotripsy devices

PURPOSE

To investigate the fragmentation capacity, clearance time, and drilling speed of combined ultrasonic with impact dual-energy and single energy ultrasonic lithotripter devices.

METHODS

Stone fragmentation and clearance tests were performed under direct view in an underwater layered hemisphere by four different operators using artificial stones (n = 10/operator). Time for complete clearance was measured. Drilling tests were performed using an underwater setup, consisting of a mounting rack for fixing the lithotripter handpiece with the probe in vertical position and in contact with the stone phantom placed on one side of a balance for defined and constant contact application pressure equivalent to 450 g load. Time until complete perforation or in case of no perforation, the penetration depth after 60 s into the stone sample was recorded. Four devices, one single energy device (SED), one dual-energy dual probe (DEDP), two dual-energy single probe (DESP-1, DESP-2), with different parameters were tested.

RESULTS

Stone fragmentation and clearance speed were significantly faster for dual-energy device DESP-1 compared to all other devices (p < 0.001). Using DESP-1, the clearance time needed was 26.0 ± 5.0 s followed by DESP-2, SED and DEDP requiring 38.4 ± 5.8 s, 40.1 ± 6.3 s and 46.3 ± 11.6 s, respectively. Regarding the drilling speed, DESP-1 was faster compared to all other devices used (p < 0.05). While the drilling speed of DESP-1 was 0.69 ± 0.19 mm/s, compared to 0.49 ± 0.18 mm/s of DESP-2, 0.47 ± 0.09 mm/s of DEDP, and 0.19 ± 0.03 mm/s of SED.

CONCLUSIONS

The dual-energy/single-probe device combining ultrasonic vibrations with electromechanical impact was significantly faster in fragmentation and clearing stone phantoms as well as in drilling speed compared to all other devices.