Indications and contraindications for shock wave lithotripsy and how to improve outcomes

Prospective Evaluation of Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy in Renal and Upper Ureteric Stone Treatment: Clinical Assessment and Results

INTRODUCTION

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a widely accepted non-invasive treatment for renal and upper ureteric stones smaller than 2 cm due to its safety and efficacy. Despite advancements in minimally invasive techniques, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy remains an important modality.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

This prospective observational study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ESWL in managing renal and upper ureteric stones measuring less than 2 cm in terms of stone clearance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a study conducted at a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital, 119 patients with renal and upper ureteric stones underwent extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy over a 12-month period. Data on patient demographics, stone characteristics, treatment procedures, and complications were collected. Follow-up assessments were performed at two-week intervals for up to two months post-treatment.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 39.78 years, with a mean stone size of 1.2 cm. Right kidney stones were more prevalent (61.3% [n=76]). Complications included fever (19.3% [n=23]), gross haematuria (24.3% [n=29]), and steinstrasse (21.8% [n=26]). The success rate of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy was 81.5% (n=97), with 18.5% (n=22) of patients requiring surgical intervention due to incomplete fragmentation or residual fragments >4 mm. Stone size and density played significant roles in treatment success.

CONCLUSION

Despite advancements in minimally invasive techniques, ESWL retains its significance as a noninvasive and effective treatment option for renal and upper ureteric stones smaller than 2 cm. Its success depends on various factors, including the stone site, size, and composition. ESWL offers advantages such as minimal morbidity, shorter hospital stays, and better patient compliance. Complications such as steinstrasse are manageable with conservative measures or ancillary procedures. While ESWL may be losing ground in some cases, its noninvasive nature and favourable outcomes make it a valuable option in the armamentarium for stone management.

Five historical innovations that have shaped modern urological surgery

Throughout history, many innovations have contributed to the development of modern urological surgery, improving patient outcomes and expanding the range of treatment options available to patients. This article explores five key historical innovations that have shaped modern urological surgery: External shockwave lithotripsy, transurethral resection of prostate, cystoscope, perioperative prostate-specific antigen and robotic surgery. The selection of innovations for inclusion in this article was meticulously determined through expert consensus and an extensive literature review. We will review the development, impact and significance of each innovation, highlighting their contributions to the field of urological surgery and their ongoing relevance in contemporary and perioperative practice.

Photonic Lithotripsy: Near-Infrared Laser Activated Nanomaterials for Kidney Stone Comminution

Near-infrared activated nanomaterials have been reported for biomedical applications ranging from photothermal tumor destruction to biofilm eradication and energy-gated drug delivery. However, the focus so far has been on soft tissues, and little is known about energy delivery to hard tissues, which have thousand-fold higher mechanical strength. We present photonic lithotripsy with carbon and gold nanomaterials for fragmenting human kidney stones. The efficacy of stone comminution is dependent on the size and photonic properties of the nanomaterials. Surface restructuring and decomposition of calcium oxalate to calcium carbonate support the contribution of photothermal energy to stone failure. Photonic lithotripsy has several advantages over current laser lithotripsy, including low operating power, noncontact laser operation (distances of at least 10 mm), and ability to break all common stones. Our observations can inspire the development of rapid, minimally invasive techniques for kidney stone treatment and extrapolate to other hard tissues such as enamel and bone.

The feasibility of ultrasound-guided mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for ESWL-resistant lower calyx renal stones of up to two centimeters: a single center experience

Lower pole renal stones present a significant challenge in urologic practice due to difficulty in accessing the calyx and eliminating fragments. Management options for these stones include watchful waiting for asymptomatic stones, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), ureterorenoscopy (URS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Mini-PCNL is a newer modification of conventional PCNL. The study aimed to assess the feasibility of mini-PCNL in treating lower pole renal stones equal to or less than 20mm that were not responsive to ESWL therapy. We included 42 patients (24 male and 18 female) with a mean age of 40±2.3 who underwent mini-PCNL at a single urology center between June 2020 and July 2022 and assessed operative and postoperative outcomes. The mean total operative time was 47±3.11 minutes, ranging from 40 to 60 minutes. The stone-free rate was 90%, and the overall complication rate was 26%, which included minor bleeding (5%), hematuria (7%), pain (12%), and fever (2%). The mean hospital stay was 80±3.34 hours (3-4 days). Our findings suggest that mini-PCNL is an effective treatment option for lower pole renal stones that are not responsive to ESWL therapy. The immediate stone-free rate was high, with minimum non-serious complications.

Shock Wave Therapy in Plastic Surgery: A Review of the Current Indications

BACKGROUND

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) represents a promising, non-invasive management strategy supporting the treatment of a variety of conditions related to plastic surgery.

OBJECTIVES

This literature review aimed to give a systematic overview of current applications, its mechanism of action, and its potential to provide tangible therapies in plastic surgery.

METHODS

The databases PubMed (National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD), Embase (via Ovid [Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands]), and the Cochrane Library (Cochrane, London, UK) were searched for articles published up to June 1, 2021. Clinical studies of any design including ESWT in the context of plastic surgery were included. Two reviewers extracted data, and 46 articles were analyzed after application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Forty-six included studies (n = 1496) were categorized into the following broad themes: cellulite/body contouring/skin rejuvenation, burns/scar treatment, diabetic foot ulcers/chronic wound, and future perspectives of ESWT. Overall, applications of ESWT were heterogenous, and the majority of studies reported effectiveness of ESWT as an alternative treatment technique. Flawed methodology and differences in technical standards limit the outcome and conclusion of this review.

CONCLUSIONS

There is yet insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of any specific intervention included in this review; however, all included studies reported improvements in key outcomes. Where reported, ESWT displayed a good safety profile with no serious adverse events. Further research is needed to provide more evidence to delineate the indications of ESWT in plastic surgery.

Comparison of ultrasonography and fluoroscopy as guides for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in nephrolithiasis patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is one of the first-line treatment options for patients with renal stones <2 cm. The large variability in ESWL results may be due to the stone visualization methods using ultrasonography (USG), fluoroscopy, or a combination of both. This study aimed to review the efficacy and safety of the stone visualization method on the stone-free rate (SFR) and postprocedural complications in nephrolithiasis patients. METHODS We conducted a systematic review of USG and fluoroscopy on ESWL until July 2022, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We assessed and collected summaries of the screened papers. The main outcomes assessed were the SFR of renal stones and postprocedural complications between imaging modalities. RESULTS A total of 7 studies were assessed, including 6 comparative assessments of USG versus fluoroscopy and 1 comparative assessment of USG and fluoroscopy versus fluoroscopy only. Although all studies showed that USG had a higher SFR than fluoroscopy, only 1 study showed a significant difference (p = 0.008). Additionally, superior results were obtained using a combination of USG and fluoroscopy compared with fluoroscopy only. Most studies agreed that USG was not inferior in post-ESWL complication results. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the use of USG is comparable to fluoroscopy because it does not provide a significant difference in the SFR and complications. In most cases, USG is preferred because of the absence of radiation. The combination of fluoroscopy and USG also provides more promising results than a single modality.

Extremely slow, half-number shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral stones

To elucidate and compare the efficacy and safety of the reduced (30 shocks/min with 1200 shocks/session) and standard protocols (60 shocks/min with 2400 shocks/session) of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for ureteral stones treatment. This study was a retrospective review of 2410 SWL procedures with reduced or standard protocols (groups R and S) in 1106 patients for ureteral stones between March 2014 and March 2021. The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as the absence of residual fragments on ultrasonography and plain radiography within 30 and 90 days. A multivariate logistic regression and propensity score matching analysis evaluated the association between the reduced protocol and treatment success. This study included 311 and 544 patients in the reduced (R) and standard (S) protocol groups, respectively. The patient's characteristics were comparable, excluding the lithotripter machine. No significant difference was observed between groups R and S in treatment success rates within 30 (63.3 vs. 65.8%, p = 0.50) and 90 days (88.7 vs. 91.5%, p = 0.18). The multivariate analysis indicated no significant association between reduced protocol and treatment success within 30 and 90 days (p = 0.44 and p = 0.68, respectively). Propensity score matching showed no significant difference in the treatment success rates within 30 and 90 days. The Extremely slow, half number protocol outcomes are comparable to those of the standard protocol for treating ureteral stones.

Translational Applications of Extracorporeal Shock Waves in Dental Medicine: A Literature Review

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been studied and applied extensively in medical practice for various applications including musculoskeletal, dermal, vascular, and cardiac indications. These indications have emerged from primary ESWT use in treating urolithiasis and cholelithiasis. Likewise, dental medicine has had its share of utilizing ESWT in various investigations. This review aimed to provide an up-to-date summary of ESWT use in preclinical and clinical dental medicine. There is growing interest in ESWT use stemming from its non-invasiveness, low cost, and safe qualities in addition to its proven regenerative biostimulating aspects. Targeted tissue and parameters of ESWT delivery continue to be an integral part of successful ESWT treatment to attain the clinical value of the anticipated dose’s effect.

Tissue neutrophil elastase contributes to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy-induced kidney damage and the neutrophil elastase inhibitor, sivelestat, attenuates kidney damage with gratifying immunohistopathological and biochemical findings: an experimental study

Although the efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been well established within the literature, debate continues on the safety of the procedure while focusing on cellular injury and its long-term consequences. Here, we describe the role of neutrophil elastase (NE) in ESWL-related rat kidney damage and investigate the protective effects of sivelestat, an inhibitor of NE, during the early and late phases. Four groups including control, ESWL alone, ESWL with sivelestat 50 mg/kg and ESWL with treatment of 100 mg/kg, each consisting of ten rats were created. Biochemical parameters of kidney function and damage and immunohistopathological findings were compared in the early (72 h after ESWL) and late (1 week after ESWL) periods between the groups. During the early period, serum and urine creatinine levels and urine kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) levels and the KIM-1/creatinine ratio increased in rats treated with ESWL compared to the control group. Furthermore, increased tissue inflammation, ductal dilatation and hemorrhage, and glomerular, tubular, and interstitial damage with increased NE staining were also detected in the ESWL treatment group. During the late phase, although urine KIM-1 levels remained stable at high levels, other parameters showed significant improvements. On the other hand, the administration of sivelestat 50 mg/kg decreased serum creatinine and urine KIM-1 and KIM-1/creatinine levels significantly in rats treated with ESWL, during the early and late periods. Significant decreases in tissue inflammation, tubular, and interstitial tissue damage were also observed during the early period. In conclusion, ESWL-related kidney tissue damage occurs primarily during the early period, and NE is involved in this process. On the other hand, the NE inhibitor sivelestat attenuated this ESWL-induced kidney damage.

Endourological treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. What are the benefits of flexible ureterorenoscopy?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Currently, there are no established criteria regarding treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. The objective of this work is to present our results in the endourological treatment of this pathology, analyzing the variables associated with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 103 patients who underwent retrograde URS with semi-rigid or flexible ureterorenoscope. Proximal location: L2-L3. Medial location: L4-L5. Semirigid URS was the initial treatment, with conversion to flexible URS when it was required to complete the procedure. Success was defined as absence of residual fragments (6 weeks). Demographic, surgical, immediate postoperative variables, and those related to the stone, were analyzed. Their correlation with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope was evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean age: 57.2 years (SD 15.6); there were 73 men (70.9%). Stone size: 8 mm (range 4-30; IQR 4.5). Proximal location: 58 (56.3%). Previous JJ: 44.7%. Previous nephrostomy: 10.7%. Semirigid URS with conversion to flexible URS: 51 (49.5%). Impacted stones: 28.2%. Intraoperative complications: 2 (1.9%). Postoperative JJ: 84.5%. Immediate postoperative complications: 23 (22.3%) (Clavien-Dindo I-II: 91.3%). Postoperative ureteral stricture: 5.8%. Success: 88.4%. Residual fragments: 12 (11.7%). Spontaneous passage: 6 (50%). Greater performance of flexible URS in proximal ureteral stones (p = 0.001) of more than 11 mm (p = 0.02) in univariate analysis, and in proximal stones [OR 3.5; 1.5-8.1; p = 0.004] in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Endourological treatment obtained a high success rate in our sample. Size greater than 11 mm and proximal ureteral location in univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively, behaved as predictors of flexible URS.

Endourological treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. What are the benefits of flexible ureterorenoscopy?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Currently, there are no established criteria regarding treatment for lumbar ureteral stones. The objective of this work is to present our results in the endourological treatment of this pathology, analyzing the variables associated with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 103 patients who underwent retrograde URS with semi-rigid or flexible ureterorenoscope. Proximal location: L2-L3. Medial location: L4-L5. Semirigid URS was the initial treatment, with conversion to flexible URS when it was required to complete the procedure. Success was defined as absence of residual fragments (6 weeks). Demographic, surgical, immediate postoperative variables, and those related to the stone, were analyzed. Their correlation with the use of the flexible ureterorenoscope was evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean age: 57.2 years (SD 15.6); there were 73 men (70.9%). Stone size: 8mm (range 4-30; IQR 4.5). Proximal location: 58 (56.3%). Previous JJ: 44.7%. Previous nephrostomy: 10.7%. Semirigid URS with conversion to flexible URS: 51 (49.5%). Impacted stones: 28.2%. Intraoperative complications: 2 (1.9%). Postoperative JJ: 84.5%. Immediate postoperative complications: 23 (22.3%) (Clavien-Dindo I-II: 91.3%). Postoperative ureteral stricture: 5.8%. Success: 88.4%. Residual fragments: 12 (11.7%). Spontaneous passage: 6 (50%). Greater performance of flexible URS in proximal ureteral stones (P=0.001) of more than 11mm (P=0.02) in univariate analysis, and in proximal stones [OR 3.5; 1.5-8.1; P=0.004] in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Endourological treatment obtained a high success rate in our sample. Size greater than 11mm and proximal ureteral location in univariate and multivariate analysis, respectively, behaved as predictors of flexible URS.

Automated Generation of Personalized Shock Wave Lithotripsy Protocols: Treatment Planning Using Deep Learning

Background

Though shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) has developed to be one of the most common treatment approaches for nephrolithiasis in recent decades, its treatment planning is often a trial-and-error process based on physicians’ subjective judgement. Physicians’ inexperience with this modality can lead to low-quality treatment and unnecessary risks to patients.

Objective

To improve the quality and consistency of shock wave lithotripsy treatment, we aimed to develop a deep learning model for generating the next treatment step by previous steps and preoperative patient characteristics and to produce personalized SWL treatment plans in a step-by-step protocol based on the deep learning model.

Methods

We developed a deep learning model to generate the optimal power level, shock rate, and number of shocks in the next step, given previous treatment steps encoded by long short-term memory neural networks and preoperative patient characteristics. We constructed a next-step data set (N=8583) from top practices of renal SWL treatments recorded in the International Stone Registry. Then, we trained the deep learning model and baseline models (linear regression, logistic regression, random forest, and support vector machine) with 90% of the samples and validated them with the remaining samples.

Results

The deep learning models for generating the next treatment steps outperformed the baseline models (accuracy = 98.8%, F1 = 98.0% for power levels; accuracy = 98.1%, F1 = 96.0% for shock rates; root mean squared error = 207, mean absolute error = 121 for numbers of shocks). The hypothesis testing showed no significant difference between steps generated by our model and the top practices (P=.480 for power levels; P=.782 for shock rates; P=.727 for numbers of shocks).

Conclusions

The high performance of our deep learning approach shows its treatment planning capability on par with top physicians. To the best of our knowledge, our framework is the first effort to implement automated planning of SWL treatment via deep learning. It is a promising technique in assisting treatment planning and physician training at low cost.

Contralateral Coupling During Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy for Stones in Ectopic Kidney: Is It Feasible?

Purpose: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) results in a lower stone-free rate (SFR) for ectopic kidneys when using the standard technique, directing the shock wave from the same side of the stone; however, this may not be the optimal approach when the ectopic kidney is located more medial and anterior than the normally positioned kidney. Thus, contralateral coupling where waves come from the opposite direction may result in a better outcome. We tested the feasibility and outcome of contralateral coupling during SWL for stone in ectopic kidney. Materials and Methods: We prospectively recruited 20 patients with simple renal ectopia, who presented with renal stones that were amenable for SWL in the period between 2014 and 2018 at outpatient clinic of urology department, Minia University. Patients received SWL in Private Nile SWL Center were included to benefit from the ability of the electromagnetic SWL lithotripter. We did SWL in a supine position, and then contralateral coupling was performed from the opposite side of the affected kidney, rather than using the standard ipsilateral coupling approach. The SFR and various pre-, intra-, and postprocedural SWL variables were assessed, including stone characteristics, body habitus, shock wave numbers, and auxiliary measures. Count and percentages were calculated. Results: The mean stone radius was 14.7 mm with a mean S.T.O.N.E. (size, topography, obstructions, number of stones, and evaluation of HUs) of 9.6 points. Effective SWL was achieved in 80% of cases, 65% of them were stone free with effective single SWL session in 56% of cases. Hematuria, infection, and obstruction occurred in 50%, 20%, and 15% cases, respectively. One case required ureteral stent insertion. Conclusions: SWL applied through contralateral coupling is feasible, with comparable safety profile to the standard ipsilateral approach. Better SFR was achieved with the contralateral approach, in fewer sessions. However, the recruitment of more cases is necessary.

It Comes As a Shock: Kidney Repair Using Shockwave Therapy

Chronic kidney disease is a global health care burden, yet clinically-proven treatments are limited. Low-intensity shockwave, which utilizes ≈10% of the energy levels used in clinically indicated shockwave lithotripsy, is a promising technique to ameliorate ischemia and regenerate tissues. It has been demonstrated to improve healing in tissues such as bone, muscle, myocardium, and kidney via several mechanisms, particularly through promoting neovascularization. Low-intensity shockwave stimulates mechanoreceptors located primarily in endothelial and proximal tubular cells and subsequently upregulates vascular endothelial growth factors. This, in turn, promotes angiogenesis and ameliorates renal hypoxia, inflammation, and fibrosis, and ultimately preserves renal function. Furthermore, low-intensity shockwave can stimulate release of homing factors to attract endothelial progenitor or stem cells into injured kidneys for tissue repair. These effects may be beneficial in several kidney disease models, including renal artery stenosis, diabetic kidney disease, and various chronic kidney diseases, although most studies reported to date have been performed in animal models. Because of its low energy intensity, the procedure is relatively tolerable and safe, yet, more clinical studies are needed to establish its efficacy beyond currently existing strategies. Therefore, low-intensity shockwave therapy emerges as an alternative therapeutic approach that may offer a promising noninvasive intervention for treating renal diseases. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02515461; NCT03602807; and NCT03445247.

Is Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy the Modality of Choice Versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy for a 20 to 30 mm Single Renal Pelvic Stone with ≤1000 Hounsfield Unit in Adults? A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study

Objectives: To compare the efficacy, complications, and costs of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in the treatment of a 20 to 30 mm single renal pelvic stone with a density ≤1000 HU. Patients and Methods: Eighty patients were prospectively randomized to receive either PNL or SWL during May 2017 to April 2019. The relevant demographic and clinical characteristics were compared. Results: The mean age in the PNL and SWL groups was 43.25 ± 15.16 and 44.18 ± 12.08 years, respectively. The mean stone sizes were 25.2 ± 3.9 and 24.6 ± 2.3 mm, respectively. The stone-free rate (SFR) was significantly different after the primary procedures (92.5% vs 37.5%, respectively; p < 0.04), but it was comparable after 3 months (97.5% vs 90%, respectively; p = 0.723), with a higher rate of auxiliary procedures after SWL (p = 0.017). On multivariate analysis, stone density was the only significant variable for the SFR in the SWL group (p = 0.004). Complications occurred in 27.5% and 22.5% of cases, respectively (p = 0.796). The mean costs of SWL (650.23 ± 424.74 United States Dollars [US$]) were significantly lower than those of PNL (1137.65 ± 224.43 US$; p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The SFRs for PNL and SWL were not significantly different after 3 months in the treatment of a 20 to 30 mm single renal pelvic stone with ≤1000 HU, although PNL provided a significantly higher rate after its primary procedure. SWL was significantly less costly, but it mandated a significantly higher number of auxiliary procedures than PNL.

Laparotomy for duodenal obstruction, caused by a renal haematoma after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy is a widely used, acceptable and common first line treatment for non-conservatively managed renal and ureteric stone disease. Although considered a relatively safe non invasive treatment for renal and ureteric stones, can carry with it significant associated morbiditiy especially in high risk patients, such as those who are anticoagulated. Renal haematomas are not an uncommon finding after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, however, fewer than 1% of patients presenting with a symptomatic renal haematoma require intervention in the form of urgent embolisation under interventional radiology, or emergency nephrectomy. Rare cases of splenic and hepatic haematomas have been reported and rarer still cases of gastro-intestinal perforation following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. We report a case with a significant renal haematoma needing emergency embolisation of the renal artery, and subsequent development of duodenal obstruction from direct haematoma compression requiring a laparotomy and intended duodenal jejunal bypass.

Level of evidence: 5