Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL): outcomes from a national SWL database in New Zealand

Factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral stones: a retrospective study

The aim of the study was to analyze the factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of ureteral stones. The clinical data of 8102 patients (6083 men and 2019 women) who presented with ureteral stones were retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were treated with ultrasound-guided ESWL. The stone-free rate (SFR) was calculated to evaluate the effect of ESWL. The characteristics of the patients and their stones, and the ESWL parameters applied were compared to identify the factors affecting the treatment outcomes. The SFR and that following one ESWL session were 94.6% (7663/8102) and 75.4% (6107/8102), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that stone location (OR 0.656, p < 0.001), stone size (OR 1.103, p < 0.001), and degree of hydronephrosis (OR 1.952, p < 0.001) independently affected SFR; and age (OR 1.005, p = 0.022), stone location (OR 0.729, p < 0.001), stone size (OR 1.103, p < 0.001), degree of hydronephrosis (OR 1.387, p = 0.001), maximum energy level(OR 0.691, p < 0.001) independently affected SFR following one session. Ultrasound-guided ESWL is effective in all levels of ureteral stones. Large stone size and moderate hydronephrosis are correlated with treatment failure. Ultrasound-guided ESWL may be the first choice for distal ureteral stones.

International Alliance of Urolithiasis Guideline on Shockwave Lithotripsy

Different international associations have proposed their own guidelines on urolithiasis. However, the focus is primarily on an overview of the principles of urolithiasis management rather than step-by-step technical details for the procedure. The International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU) is releasing a series of guidelines on the management of urolithiasis. The current guideline on shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is the third in the IAU guidelines series and provides a clinical framework for urologists and technicians performing SWL. A total of 49 recommendations are summarized and graded, covering the following aspects: indications and contraindications; preoperative patient evaluation; preoperative medication; prestenting; intraoperative analgesia or anesthesia; intraoperative position; stone localization and monitoring; machine and energy settings; intraoperative lithotripsy strategies; auxiliary therapy following SWL; evaluation of stone clearance; complications; and quality of life. The recommendations, tips, and tricks regarding SWL procedures summarized here provide important and necessary guidance for urologists along with technicians performing SWL. PATIENT SUMMARY: For kidney and urinary stones of less than 20 mm in size, shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is an approach in which the stone is treated with shockwaves applied to the skin, without the need for surgery. Our recommendations on technical aspects of the procedure provide guidance for urologists and technicians performing SWL.

Fragmentation of Stones by Burst Wave Lithotripsy in the First 19 Humans

PURPOSE

We report stone comminution in the first 19 human subjects by burst wave lithotripsy (BWL), which is the transcutaneous application of focused, cyclic ultrasound pulses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective multi-institutional feasibility study recruiting subjects undergoing clinical ureteroscopy (URS) for at least 1 stone ≤12 mm as measured on computerized tomography. During the planned URS, either before or after ureteroscope insertion, BWL was administered with a handheld transducer, and any stone fragmentation and tissue injury were observed. Up to 3 stones per subject were targeted, each for a maximum of 10 minutes. The primary effectiveness outcome was the volume percent comminution of the stone into fragments ≤2 mm. The primary safety outcome was the independent, blinded visual scoring of tissue injury from the URS video.

RESULTS

Overall, median stone comminution was 90% (IQR 20, 100) of stone volume with 21 of 23 (91%) stones fragmented. Complete fragmentation (all fragments ≤2 mm) within 10 minutes of BWL occurred in 9 of 23 stones (39%). Of the 6 least comminuted stones, likely causative factors for decreased effectiveness included stones that were larger than the BWL beamwidth, smaller than the BWL wavelength or the introduction of air bubbles from the ureteroscope. Mild reddening of the papilla and hematuria emanating from the papilla were observed ureteroscopically.

CONCLUSIONS

The first study of BWL in human subjects resulted in a median of 90% comminution of the total stone volume into fragments ≤2 mm within 10 minutes of BWL exposure with only mild tissue injury.

Determining the true burden of kidney stone disease

The incidence and prevalence of kidney stones have increased over the past four decades. However, the diagnosis of 'kidney stone' can range from an incidental asymptomatic finding of limited clinical significance to multiple painful episodes of ureteral obstruction with eventual kidney failure. Some general strategies may be useful to prevent the recurrence of kidney stones. In particular, greater attention to kidney stone classification, approaches to assessing the risk of recurrence and individualized prevention strategies may improve the clinical care of stone formers. Although there have been some advances in approaches to predicting the recurrence of kidney stones, notable challenges remain. Studies of kidney stone prevalence, incidence and recurrence have reported inconsistent findings, in part because of the lack of a standardized stone classification system. A kidney stone classification system based on practical and clinically useful measures of stone disease may help to improve both the study and clinical care of stone formers. Any future kidney stone classification system should be aimed at distinguishing asymptomatic from symptomatic stones, clinically diagnosed symptomatic stone episodes from self-reported symptomatic stone episodes, symptomatic stone episodes that are confirmed from those that are suspected, symptomatic recurrence from radiographic recurrence (that is, with radiographic evidence of a new stone, stone growth or stone disappearance from presumed passage) and determine stone composition based on mutually exclusive categories.

Negative impact of being underweight on the outcomes of single-session shockwave lithotripsy in patients with upper urinary tract calculi: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the association between being underweight and shockwave lithotripsy outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective two-centre cohort study conducted in Japan involved 597 patients diagnosed with a single urinary tract calculus based on computed tomography and who underwent shockwave lithotripsy between 2006 and 2016. We divided the patients into four groups based on their body mass index (underweight, ≤  18.4; normal weight, 18.5-24.9; overweight, 25-29.9; obese,  ≥  30 kg/m²). We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis and estimated the odds ratio for success of single-session shockwave lithotripsy.

RESULTS

Of the 597 patients, 25 (4.2%) were underweight and 34 (5.7%) were obese. After adjusting for age, sex, calculus localisation, maximum stone length, mean stone density, and skin-to-stone distance, being underweight showed a significantly negative association with success of single-session shockwave lithotripsy (odds ratio 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.69) compared to being normal weight.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed the negative impact of being underweight on the outcomes of shockwave lithotripsy in patients with upper urinary tract calculi. This finding provides a novel viewpoint regarding the body mass index and should aid improved treatment selection for patients with upper urinary tract calculi.

Impact of Case Volume on Shock Wave Lithotripsy Outcomes: Data from the National Shock Wave Lithotripsy Database of New Zealand

Purpose: To assess the impact of individual operator case volume on shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment outcomes in more than 9000 stone cases over a 20-year period in New Zealand. Materials and Methods: Stone cases treated with SWL on the Mobile Medical Technology (MMT) vehicle between June 19, 1995, and December 1, 2014, were identified. Data collection was undertaken prospectively for patient, stone, and treatment characteristics, and retrospectively for treatment outcomes. Multivariate analysis using binary logistic regression was undertaken to assess whether radiographer stone case volume (stones/year) was an independent predictor of SWL success (stone free or clinically insignificant residual fragments ≤4 mm at follow-up). Results: Sixteen radiographers delivered treatment to the included cohort (9039 stone cases), with a median case volume (stones/year) of 73 (range: 37-197) and median total of 425 stones treated (range: 71-1721). The two radiographers with highest case volumes achieved the highest success rates. Radiographer case volume (stones/year) was independently associated with SWL success (odds ratio [OR]: 1.004, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.003-1.005, p < 0.0001) and reduced need for post-SWL hospital admission (OR: 0.997, 95% CI: 0.994-1.000, p = 0.028), but there was no associated decrease in post-SWL urosepsis (OR: 0.999, 95% CI: 0.974-1.025, p = 0.941), perinephric hematoma (OR: 1.003, 95% CI: 0.985-1.020, p = 0.778), or need for auxiliary procedures (OR: 1.000, 95% CI: 0.998-1.002, p = 0.871). Conclusions: SWL success rates can be improved by increasing the frequency of cases performed by individual operators. In this multicenter cohort of more than 9000 stone cases treated over a 20-year period, the best outcomes were seen for those radiographers performing >150 cases per year.

Leave no stone unturned: defining recurrence in kidney stone formers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Established guidelines provide recommendations on the management of kidney stones to prevent recurrence. However, clear and clinically useful terminology for recurrence of kidney stones is needed. This review describes the various manifestations of kidney stone recurrence and the reported rates of kidney stone recurrence in various clinical settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Kidney stone recurrence has a wide range of symptomatic and radiographic presentations. Symptomatic recurrence may include characteristic symptoms of stone passage via the ureter (renal colic and gross hematuria). This may be self-managed or result in clinical care, with or without confirmation of an obstructing stone on imaging. Radiographic recurrence has been variably defined as new stone formation, stone growth, or stone disappearance (from passage with or without symptoms). Studies have used inconsistent definitions of recurrence, and recurrence rates vary substantially. Stone free rates and residual stone fragment size after surgical interventions are useful predictors of symptomatic recurrence.

SUMMARY

The recurrence rate of kidney stones has been assessed in stone formers from sub-specialty clinics, the general community, and clinical trials. The definition of recurrence is quite heterogenous between studies, but the rate of recurrence generally increases as more manifestations are included in the definition.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy under intravenous sedation for treatment of urolithiasis

BACKGROUND

In contrast to treatment with oral or intramuscular analgesics, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (E.S.W.L.) can be performed with patients under sedation too. Besides the advantage of increased shock energy, patients tend to have more constant breathing excursions and are more idle during treatment, potentially increasing the stone-free ratio (S.F.R.) after treatment.

METHODS

This study presents the results of 310 patients who underwent 400 E.S.W.L. procedures under sedation, with a stationary lithotripter.

RESULTS

After one procedure, the S.F.R. was 54.8% (170/310). A second treatment was successful in 42.1% (32/76), a third treatment in 21.4% (3/14). Therefore, 66.1% (205/310) of patients eventually became stone-free. Kidney stones were successfully treated in 65.4% (161/246), ureteral stones in 68.8% (44/64) of cases. Patients with stones ≤15 mm were successfully treated in 67.4% (194/288), patients with stones >15 mm in 50% (11/22) of cases. Considering each procedure individually, 45.3% (181/400) of procedures were successful after 3 weeks. Extending follow-up to 3 months is important, since 26.7% of stones (24/90) eventually still disappeared, increasing S.F.R. to 51.3% after one procedure. Complications occurred after 5.5% E.S.W.L.-procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

E.S.W.L. is a well-tolerated, non-invasive procedure that produces reasonable stone clearance of both upper and lower urinary tract calculi. Performing the procedure whilst patients are intravenously sedated results in an acceptable S.F.R. Strong selection based on unfavourable factors could increase the chance on successful treatment and spare patients a pointless procedure. However, considering E.S.W.L.'s elegant nature, sometimes a more tolerant approach seems justifiable.

Comparison of safety and outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy between elderly and non-elderly patients

Background

This study compared the clinical outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy between elderly (aged $65 years) and non-elderly (aged <65 years) patients.

Methods

A retrospective review of medical records was performed on 483 (non-elderly: 245, elderly: 238) patients with upper urinary tract stones who underwent shock wave lithotripsy between 2007 and 2015. The demographic data, stone parameters, stone-free rate, retreatment rate, and complication rate were analyzed in both elderly and non-elderly patient groups.

Results

There was no significant difference between non-elderly and elderly patients in terms of stone-free rate (46.5% vs 41.1%, P>0.05) regardless of stone site or stone size and overall retreatment rate (41.6% vs 37.0%, P>0.05). Elderly patients had a higher complication rate than non-elderly patients (15.5% vs 23.5%, P=0.026). The most common complication was flank pain. Receiver operating characteristic curves predicted that elderly patients (cutoff value: 65 years of age) had a higher risk of complications and that patients with smaller stones (cutoff value: 0.8 cm) had a higher stone-free rate.

Conclusion

This study showed that elderly patients with upper urinary tract stones undergoing shock wave lithotripsy had comparable efficacy for stone-free rates and retreatment rates, but higher complication rates.

Current ESWL practice and outcomes in the UK: A multicentre snapshot

Objectives:

The objective of this article is to investigate the current clinical practice and outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in the United Kingdom.

Patients and methods:

Patient demographics, stone characteristics and SWL protocols were collected prospectively for 30 consecutive new patient referrals at each of seven contributing UK institutions performing SWL. Final outcomes in terms of stone-free rates (SFRs), and complications were recorded.

Results:

Completed demographic data were available for 204 patients. Treatment protocols varied between centres. Mean patient age was 51 years. Over 70% of stones treated measured between 5 and 10 mm, and one-third were in the ureter, with two-thirds in the kidney, where the majority (31% overall) were in the lower pole. The overall cumulative SFR was 50.3% (range 33–70% between centres). SWL was notably more effective for ureteric stones (SFR 59.3% overall) than for renal calculi (SFR 45.6% overall). Complications were noted in six patients.

Conclusion:

This study provides a valuable snapshot of real-life clinical practice and demonstrates considerable variability in the application of SWL in the UK. The results support existing data which suggest that SWL is a safe and well tolerated treatment modality; however, overall SFRs were low.

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

This study was designed to find out the optimized energy delivery strategy in Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) that yield to the best stone-free rate (SFR). In this clinical trial, 150 consecutive patients were randomized into three groups: (a) Dose escalation, 1500 SW at 18 kV, followed by 1500 SW at 20 kV then 1500 SW at 22 kV. (b) Constant dose, 4500 SW at 20 kV. All patients undergo plain X-ray film of the urinary tract at day 1, 14, and 90 to assess stone-free rate (SFR) which was defined as no stones or painless fragments less than 4 mm. (c) Dose reduction, 1500 SW at 22 kV, followed by 1500 SW at 20 kV and then 1500 SW at 18 kV. The three treatment groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, stone size and distribution of the kidneys, and the need for Double J stent use. On day 90, the SFR achieved was 82, 90, and 84 % in the escalating, constant, and reduction energy groups, respectively. However, this rate was not statistically significant (x ² = 1.38, p level = 0.28). At a slow rate of 60 shocks, there was no difference in stone-free rate between different voltages at 1, 14, and 90 days. Our randomized clinical trial showed no statistically significant difference in SFR between the three groups while using the slow SWL rate. Our trial is the first randomized trial comparing the three strategies. As such, a dose adjustment strategy while delivering SWL in slow rate was not recommended.