Independent assessment of a wide-focus, low-pressure electromagnetic lithotripter: absence of renal bioeffects in the pig

Revealing physical interactions of ultrasound waves with the body through photoelasticity imaging

Ultrasound is a ubiquitous technology in medicine for screening, diagnosis, and treatment of disease. The functionality and efficacy of different ultrasound modes relies strongly on our understanding of the physical interactions between ultrasound waves and biological tissue structures. This article reviews the use of photoelasticity imaging for investigating ultrasound fields and interactions. Physical interactions are described for different ultrasound technologies, including those using linear and nonlinear ultrasound waves, as well as shock waves. The use of optical modulation of light by ultrasound is presented for shadowgraphic and photoelastic techniques. Investigations into shock wave and burst wave lithotripsy using photoelastic methods are summarized, along with other endoscopic forms of lithotripsy. Photoelasticity in soft tissue surrogate materials is reviewed, and its deployment in investigating tissue-bubble interactions, generated ultrasound waves, and traumatic brain injury, are discussed. With the continued growth of medical ultrasound, photoelasticity imaging can play a role in elucidating the physical mechanisms leading to useful bioeffects of ultrasound for imaging and therapy.

High-frequency shock wave lithotripsy: stone comminution and evaluation of renal parenchyma injury in a porcine ex-vivo model

BACKGROUND

The electrohydraulic high-frequency shock wave (Storz Medical, Taegerwilen, Switzerland) is a new way to create small fragments with frequencies up to 100 Hertz (Hz). This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of this method in a stone and porcine model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

BEGO stones were put in a condom in a specifically designed fixture treated with different modulations to see stone comminution. Standardized ex vivo porcine model with perfused kidneys with 26 upper and lower poles of 15 kidneys was treated with the following modulations: voltage 16-24 kV, capacitor 12 nF and frequency up to 100 Hz. 2000-20,000 shock waves were applied to each pole. The kidneys were perfused with barium sulfate solution (BaSO4) and x-ray was performed to quantify the lesions using pixel volumetry.

RESULTS

There was no correlation between the number of shock waves and the powdering degree or the applied Energy and the grade of pulverization in the stone model. Regarding the perfused kidney model, the number of shock waves, applied voltage and frequency had no direct correlation with the occurrence of parenchymal lesions The detected lesions of the renal parenchyma were minimal, technical parameters had no significant impact and the lesions did not differ from the results of former experiments using 1-1.5 Hz in the same model.

CONCLUSIONS

High-frequency shock wave lithotripsy can produce small stone fragments to pass in a very short time. The injury to the renal parenchyma is comparable to the results of the conventional SWL using 1-1.5 Hz.

In-vitro comparison of two electromagnetic shock-wave generators: low-pressure-wide focus versus high-pressure small focus - the impact on initial stone fragmentation and final stone comminution

CONTEXT

Recently developed concepts for higher efficacy ESWL with low-pressure wide focus systems resulting in finer fragmentation of the calculi.

OBJECTIVE

To compare two different electromagnetic shock wave sources (low-pressure wide focus (XL) versus high-pressure small focus (SL)) by sound-field measurements and in-vitro fragmentation.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The CS-2012A XX-ES lithotripter (self-focusing electromagnetic shock-wave generator with concave spherical curved electrical coil; Xinin Lithotripter = XL) was compared to the Siemens Lithoskop (= SL) (electromagnetic generator with a flat electric coil with an acoustical lens). Different sound-field measurements were performed using a fiber-optic hydrophone. Measurements at three different power settings (XL: 8.0kV, 9.3kV and 10.3kV; SL: Level 1, 5 and 8). 10 ATS-stones and 15 BegoStones (9.3 kV, Level 3) with a frequency of 90/minute (SL) and 20/minute (XL). Number of impulses to the first crack and for complete stone comminution (residual fragments <2mm) were documented.

RESULTS

The median number of shock waves for the first crack in ATS-stones with the XL was 12 (10-14), with the SL 7 (6-9). Complete disintegration was accomplished after 815 (782-824) shock waves with XL, 702 (688-712) with SL. The difference was not statistically significant. The median number of shock waves to produce the first crack in BegoStones was 524 (504-542) with XL and only 151 (137-161) with SL. Numbers of shock waves for complete disintegration did not differ significantly (XL:2518 vs SL:2287). Using a wide focus with low pressure shows more homogeneous disintegration.

CONCLUSION

Two stone models showed significant differences regarding form and time of the initial fragmentation. Impulses for stone comminution did not differ significantly. The advantages of a low-pressure wide focus-system include minimal trauma and a homogeneous fragment size but is more time consuming. High-pressure small focus systems are clinically effective.

Confocal lens focused piezoelectric lithotripter

This work focuses on the evaluation of a type of piezoelectric lithotripter with similar dimensions of a commercial lithotripter and composed of either 3 or 4 large lens focused piezoelectric transducers set either in a confocal coplanar C-shape or a confocal spherical shape. Each transducer is made with a 92 mm diameter 220 kHz flat piezoelectric ceramic disc and a 3D printed acoustic lens. Both confocal setups pressure field were measured with a fiber optic hydrophone, and in vitro fragmentations of 13 mm diameter and 14 mm length cylindrical model stones were done in a 2 mm mesh basket. The acoustic characterization of the three transducers confocal setup revealed a disc shaped focal volume, with a 2.2 mm width on one axis and a 9.6 mm width on the other, and a peak positive pressure of 40.9 MPa and a peak negative pressure of -16.9 MPa, while the focus of the four transducers confocal setup was similar to a traditional narrow focus high pressure lithotripter with a focus width of 2.1 mm, and a peak positive pressure of 71.9 MPa and peak negative pressure of -24.3 MPa. Both confocal setups showed in vitro fragmentation efficiency close to a commercial electroconductive lithotripter.

High-speed video microscopy and numerical modeling of bubble dynamics near a surface of urinary stone

Ultra-high-speed video microscopy and numerical modeling were used to assess the dynamics of microbubbles at the surface of urinary stones. Lipid-shell microbubbles designed to accumulate on stone surfaces were driven by bursts of ultrasound in the sub-MHz range with pressure amplitudes on the order of 1 MPa. Microbubbles were observed to undergo repeated cycles of expansion and violent collapse. At maximum expansion, the microbubbles' cross-section resembled an ellipse truncated by the stone. Approximating the bubble shape as an oblate spheroid, this study modeled the collapse by solving the multicomponent Euler equations with a two-dimensional-axisymmetric code with adaptive mesh refinement for fine resolution of the gas-liquid interface. Modeled bubble collapse and high-speed video microscopy showed a distinctive circumferential pinching during the collapse. In the numerical model, this pinching was associated with bidirectional microjetting normal to the rigid surface and toroidal collapse of the bubble. Modeled pressure spikes had amplitudes two-to-three orders of magnitude greater than that of the driving wave. Micro-computed tomography was used to study surface erosion and formation of microcracks from the action of microbubbles. This study suggests that engineered microbubbles enable stone-treatment modalities with driving pressures significantly lower than those required without the microbubbles.

Experimental observations and numerical modeling of lipid-shell microbubbles with calcium-adhering moieties for minimally-invasive treatment of urinary stones

A novel treatment modality incorporating calcium-adhering microbubbles has recently entered human clinical trials as a new minimally-invasive approach to treat urinary stones. In this treatment method, lipid-shell gas-core microbubbles can be introduced into the urinary tract through a catheter. Lipid moities with calcium-adherance properties incorporated into the lipid shell facilitate binding to stones. The microbubbles can be excited by an extracorporeal source of quasi-collimated ultrasound. Alternatively, the microbubbles can be excited by an intraluminal source, such as a fiber-optic laser. With either excitation technique, calcium-adhering microbubbles can significantly increase rates of erosion, pitting, and fragmentation of stones. We report here on new experiments using high-speed photography to characterize microbubble expansion and collapse. The bubble geometry observed in the experiments was used as one of the initial shapes for the numerical modeling. The modeling showed that the bubble dynamics strongly depends on bubble shape and stand-off distance. For the experimentally observed shape of microbubbles, the numerical modeling showed that the collapse of the microbubbles was associated with pressure increases of some two-to-three orders of magnitude compared to the excitation source pressures. This in-vitro study provides key insights into the use of microbubbles with calcium-adhering moieties in treatment of urinary stones.

Electromagnetic and Electrohydraulic Shock Wave Lithotripsy-Induced Urothelial Damage: Is There a Difference?

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the acute effect of electromagnetic and electrohydraulic extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) on the urothelial layers of kidney and ureter.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients, 29 males (58%) and 21 females (42%), with an average age of 51.68 years (range: 37-70) who underwent SWL application in two different centers were included. Twenty-eight patients (56%) were treated with electrohydraulic and 22 (44%) were treated with electromagnetic lithotripsy. Urinary cytologic examinations were done immediately before and after SWL therapy and 10 days later. The average numbers of epithelial cells, red blood cells (RBC), and myocytes were counted under 40 × magnification.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in the number of epithelial cells and RBC before and after immediate application of SWL: 1.66 and 14.9 cells/field, (p = 0.001), 5.44 and 113.45 cells/field, respectively (p = 0.001). The number of RBC was significantly higher in patients treated with electromagnetic lithotripsy than those treated with electrohydraulic: 141.9 and 93.4 cells/field, respectively (p = 0.02). No myocyte or basement membrane elements were detected in any of the cytologic examinations. Cytologic examinations done after 10 days of SWL therapy revealed recovery of all abnormal cytologic findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The acute increments in the number of epithelial cells and RBC after SWL were statistically significant but it was not permanent. SWL-induced urinary urothelial lesion is limited to the mucosal layer and there was no evidence of damage to the basal membrane or muscle layer. Electromagnetic lithotripsy caused high numbers of RBC than the electrohydraulic device on the postimmediate urine cytologic examination.

[What is the current status of shock wave lithotripsy?]

BACKGROUND

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) became the therapy of choice for the majority of patients with urolithiasis early after its introduction in the early 1980s. Since then, SWL remains the only noninvasive therapy modality for the treatment of urinary stones. Although lithotripters became more versatile and affordable-making them available worldwide-indications for SWL have shifted as well. In most western countries, endoscopic techniques took the lead in stone therapy due to high (early) stone-free and better reimbursement rates. Notwithstanding SWL remains the first-line therapy for most intrarenal and many ureteral stones.

PURPOSE

This contemporary review illuminates technical aspects and improvements of lithotripsy over recent years in context with the current guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

Technical advances in lithotripsy such as shock wave generation, focusing, coupling, stone localization and modifications in therapy regimens are reviewed and presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Urologists are recommended to carefully select the appropriate therapy modality for a patient with urolithiasis. A more comprehensive understanding of the physics of shock waves could lead to much better results, thus, endorsing SWL as first-line therapy for urolithiasis instead of contemporary endourology treatment options.

Shifting the Split Reflectors to Enhance Stone Fragmentation of Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) has been used widely in urology for about three decades to treat kidney calculi. Technical development to improve performance (i.e., stone fragmentation efficiency) is continuous. Low-pressure wide-focus lithotripters have already achieved promising results. In this study, the lithotripter field and profile of lithotripter shock waves were changed simultaneously using a cost-effective and convenient design. An intact parabolic reflector was split into four pieces, and each part was moved individually. By shifting the split reflectors, the focused acoustic beams were separated. As a result, the beam width in the focal region could be increased. Both numerical models of wave propagation using a k-wave approach and hydrophone measurements showed similar pressure waveforms at the focus and the distributions along and transverse to the lithotripter axis. The increase of the shifting distance from 0 mm to 7 mm resulted in the increase of -6 dB beam width from 7.1 mm to 13.9 mm and location of tensile peak on axis moving from z = -14 mm to 1 mm. The Lithotripters at 10 kV (intact reflector) and at 12 kV with the split reflectors shifted by 5 mm were compared with each other because of their similar peak positive pressures at the focus (8.07 MPa ± 0.05 MPa vs. 7.90 MPa ± 0.11 MPa, respectively). However, there were significant differences in their positive beam width (8.7 mm vs. 10.2 mm), peak negative pressure (-6.34 MPa ± 0.04 MPa vs. -7.13 MPa ± 0.13 MPa), the maximum tensile stress (7.55 MPa vs. 8.95 MPa) and shear stress (6.1 MPa vs. 7.76 MPa) in a 10-mm diameter spherical stone and bubble collapse time (127.6 μs ± 5.4 μs vs. 212.7 μs ± 8.2 μs). As a result, stone fragmentation efficiency was enhanced about 1.8-fold (57.9% ± 4.6% vs. 32.2% ± 5.6%, p < 0.05) when shifting the split reflectors. These results suggest that this new reflector design could change the characteristics of the lithotripter field and increase stone fragmentation efficiency.

Fragmentation of urinary calculi in vitro by burst wave lithotripsy

PURPOSE

We developed a new method of lithotripsy that uses short, broadly focused bursts of ultrasound rather than shock waves to fragment stones. We investigated the characteristics of stone comminution by burst wave lithotripsy in vitro.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Artificial and natural stones (mean ± SD size 8.2 ± 3.0 mm, range 5 to 15) were treated with ultrasound bursts using a focused transducer in a water bath. Stones were exposed to bursts with focal pressure amplitude of 6.5 MPa or less at a 200 Hz burst repetition rate until completely fragmented. Ultrasound frequencies of 170, 285 and 800 kHz were applied using 3 transducers, respectively. Time to fragmentation for each stone type was recorded and fragment size distribution was measured by sieving.

RESULTS

Stones exposed to ultrasound bursts were fragmented at focal pressure amplitudes of 2.8 MPa or greater at 170 kHz. Fractures appeared along the stone surface, resulting in fragments that separated at the surface nearest to the transducer until the stone was disintegrated. All natural and artificial stones were fragmented at the highest focal pressure of 6.5 MPa with a mean treatment duration of 36 seconds for uric acid stones to 14.7 minutes for cystine stones. At a frequency of 170 kHz the largest artificial stone fragments were less than 4 mm. Exposure at 285 and 800 kHz produced only fragments less than 2 mm and less than 1 mm, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Stone comminution with burst wave lithotripsy is feasible as a potential noninvasive treatment method for nephrolithiasis. Adjusting the fundamental ultrasound frequency allows for stone fragment size to be controlled.

Shock wave lithotripsy: the new phoenix?

INTRODUCTION

Following its introduction in 1980, shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) rapidly emerged as the first-line treatment for the majority of patients with urolithiasis. Millions of SWL therapies have since been performed worldwide, and nowadays, SWL still remains to be the least invasive therapy modality for urinary stones. During the last three decades, SWL technology has advanced in terms of shock wave generation, focusing, patient coupling and stone localization. The implementation of multifunctional lithotripters has made SWL available to urology departments worldwide. Indications for SWL have evolved as well. Although endoscopic treatment techniques have improved significantly and seem to take the lead in stone therapy in the western countries due to high stone-free rates, SWL continues to be considered as the first-line therapy for the treatment of most intra-renal stones and many ureteral stones.

METHODS

This paper reviews the fundamentals of SWL physics to facilitate a better understanding about how a lithotripter works and should be best utilized.

RESULTS

Advances in lithotripsy technology such as shock wave generation and focusing, advances in stone localization (imaging), different energy source concepts and coupling modalities are presented. Furthermore adjuncts to improve the efficacy of SWL including different treatment strategies are reviewed.

CONCLUSION

If urologists make use of a more comprehensive understanding of the pathophysiology and physics of shock waves, much better results could be achieved in the future. This may lead to a renaissance and encourage SWL as first-line therapy for urolithiasis in times of rapid progress in endoscopic treatment modalities.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: An opinion on its future

The development of miniaturized nephroscopes which allow one-stage stone clearance with minimal morbidity has brought the role of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in stone management into question. Design innovations in SWL machines over the last decade have attempted to address this problem. We reviewed the recent literature on SWL using a MEDLINE/PUBMED research. For commenting on the future of SWL, we took the subjective opinion of two senior urologists, one mid-level expert, and an upcoming junior fellow. There have been a number of recent changes in lithotripter design and techniques. This includes the use of multiple focus machines and improved coupling designs. Additional changes involve better localization real-time monitoring. The main goal of stone treatment today seems to be to get rid of the stone in one session rather than being treated multiple times non-invasively. Stone treatment in the future will be individualized by genetic screening of stone formers, using improved SWL devices for small stones only. However, there is still no consensus about the design of the ideal lithotripter. Innovative concepts such as emergency SWL for ureteric stones may be implemented in clinical routine.

Assessment of a modified acoustic lens for electromagnetic shock wave lithotripters in a swine model

PURPOSE

The acoustic lens of the Modularis electromagnetic shock wave lithotripter (Siemens, Malvern, Pennsylvania) was modified to produce a pressure waveform and focal zone more closely resembling that of the original HM3 device (Dornier Medtech, Wessling, Germany). We assessed the newly designed acoustic lens in vivo in an animal model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Stone fragmentation and tissue injury produced by the original and modified lenses of the Modularis lithotripter were evaluated in a swine model under equivalent acoustic pulse energy (about 45 mJ) at 1 Hz pulse repetition frequency. Stone fragmentation was determined by the weight percent of stone fragments less than 2 mm. To assess tissue injury, shock wave treated kidneys were perfused, dehydrated, cast in paraffin wax and sectioned. Digital images were captured every 120 μm and processed to determine functional renal volume damage.

RESULTS

After 500 shocks, the mean ± SD stone fragmentation efficiency produced by the original and modified lenses was 48% ± 12% and 52% ± 17%, respectively (p = 0.60). However, after 2,000 shocks, the modified lens showed significantly improved stone fragmentation compared to the original lens (mean 86% ± 10% vs 72% ± 12%, p = 0.02). Tissue injury caused by the original and modified lenses was minimal at a mean of 0.57% ± 0.44% and 0.25% ± 0.25%, respectively (p = 0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

With lens modification the Modularis lithotripter demonstrates significantly improved stone fragmentation with minimal tissue injury at a clinically relevant acoustic pulse energy. This new lens design could potentially be retrofitted to existing lithotripters, improving the effectiveness of electromagnetic lithotripters.

Evaluation of the LithoGold LG-380 lithotripter: in vitro acoustic characterization and assessment of renal injury in the pig model

PURPOSE

Conduct a laboratory evaluation of a novel low-pressure, broad focal zone electrohydraulic lithotripter (TRT LG-380).

METHODS

Mapping of the acoustic field of the LG-380, along with a Dornier HM3, a Storz Modulith SLX, and a XiXin CS2012 (XX-ES) lithotripter was performed using a fiberoptic hydrophone. A pig model was used to assess renal response to 3000 shockwaves (SW) administered by a multistep power ramping protocol at 60 SW/min, and when animals were treated at the maximum power setting at 120 SW/min. Injury to the kidney was assessed by quantitation of lesion size and routine measures of renal function.

RESULTS

SW amplitudes for the LG-380 ranged from (P(+)/P(-)) 7/-1.8 MPa at PL-1 to 21/-4 MPa at PL-11 while focal width measured ~20 mm, wider than the HM3 (8 mm), SLX (2.6 mm), or XX-ES (18 mm). For the LG-380, there was gradual narrowing of the focal width to ~10 mm after 5000 SWs, but this had negligible effect on breakage of model stones, because stones positioned at the periphery of the focal volume (10 mm off-axis) broke nearly as well as stones at the target point. Kidney injury measured less than 0.1% FRV (functional renal volume) for pigs treated using a gradual power ramping protocol at 60 SW/min and when SWs were delivered at maximum power at 120 SW/min.

CONCLUSIONS

The LG-380 exhibits the acoustic characteristics of a low-pressure, wide focal zone lithotripter and has the broadest focal width of any lithotripter yet reported. Although there was a gradual narrowing of focal width as the electrode aged, the efficiency of stone breakage was not affected. Because injury to the kidney was minimal when treatment followed either the recommended slow SW-rate multistep ramping protocol or when all SWs were delivered at fast SW-rate using maximum power, this appears to be a relatively safe lithotripter.

Shockwave lithotripsy-new concepts and optimizing treatment parameters

The treatment of kidney stone disease has changed dramatically over the past 30 years. This change is due in large part to the arrival of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). ESWL along with the advances in ureteroscopic and percutaneous techniques has led to the virtual extinction of open surgical treatments for kidney stone disease. Much research has gone into understanding how ESWL can be made more efficient and safe. This article discusses the parameters that can be used to optimize ESWL outcomes as well as the new concepts that are affecting the efficacy and efficiency of ESWL.

Evaluation of shock wave lithotripsy injury in the pig using a narrow focal zone lithotriptor

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Of all the SW lithotriptors manufactured to date, more research studies have been conducted on and more is known about the injury (both description of injury and how to manipulate injury size) produced by the Dornier HM-3 than any other machine. From this information have come suggestions for treatment protocols to reduce shock wave (SW)-induced injury for use in stone clinics. By contrast, much less is known about the injury produced by narrow-focus and high-pressure lithotriptors like the Storz Modulith SLX. In fact, a careful study looking at the morphology of the injury produced by the SLX itself is lacking, as is any study exploring ways to reduce renal injury by manipulating SW delivery variables of this lithotriptor. The present study quantitates the lesion size and describes the morphology of the injury produced by the SLX. In addition, we report that reducing the SW delivery rate, a manoeuvre known to lower injury in the HM-3, does not reduce lesion size in the SLX.

OBJECTIVE

• To assess renal injury in a pig model after treatment with a clinical dose of shock waves using a narrow focal zone (≈3 mm) lithotriptor (Modulith SLX, Karl Storz Lithotripsy).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

• The left kidney of anaesthetized female pigs were treated with 2000 or 4000 shock waves (SWs) at 120 SWs/min, or 2000 SWs at 60 SWs/min using the Storz SLX. • Measures of renal function (glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow) were collected before and 1 h after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and the kidneys were harvested for histological analysis and morphometric quantitation of haemorrhage in the renal parenchyma with lesion size expressed as a percentage of functional renal volume (FRV). • A fibre-optic probe hydrophone was used to determine acoustic output and map the focal width of the lithotriptor. • Data for the SLX were compared with data from a previously published study in which pigs of the same age (7-8 weeks) were treated (2000 SWs at 120 or 60 SWs/min) using an unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotriptor.

RESULTS

• Treatment with the SLX produced a highly focused lesion running from cortex to medulla and often spanning the full thickness of the kidney. Unlike the diffuse interstitial haemorrhage observed with the HM3, the SLX lesion bore a blood-filled core of near-complete tissue disruption devoid of histologically recognizable kidney structure. • Despite the intensity of tissue destruction at the core of the lesion, measures of lesion size based on macroscopic determination of haemorrhage in the parenchyma were not significantly different from kidneys treated using the HM3 (2000 SWs, 120 SWs/min: SLX, 1.86 ± 0.52% FRV; HM3, 3.93 ± 1.29% FRV). • Doubling the SW dose of the SLX from 2000 to 4000 SWs did not significantly increase lesion size. In addition, slowing the firing rate of the SLX to 60 SWs/min did not reduce the size of the lesion (2.16 ± 0.96% FRV) compared with treatment at 120 SWs/min, as was the case with the HM3 (0.42 ± 0.23% FRV vs 3.93 ± 1.29% FRV). • Renal function fell significantly below baseline in all treated groups but was similar for both lithotriptors. • Focal width of the SLX (≈2.6 mm) was about one-third that of the HM3 (≈8 mm) while peak pressures were higher (SLX at power level 9: P+≈90 MPa, P-≈-12 MPa; HM3 at 24 kV: P+≈46 MPa, P-≈-8 MPa).

CONCLUSIONS

• The lesion produced by the SLX (narrow focal width, high acoustic pressure) was a more focused, more intense form of tissue damage than occurs with the HM3. • Slowing the SW rate to 60 SWs/min, a strategy shown to be effective in reducing injury with the HM3, was not protective with the SLX. • These findings suggest that the focal width and acoustic output of a lithotriptor affect the renal response to SWL.

Reduction of bubble cavitation by modifying the diffraction wave from a lithotripter aperture

PURPOSE

A new method was devised to suppress the bubble cavitation in the lithotripter focal zone to reduce the propensity of shockwave-induced renal injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An edge extender was designed and fabricated to fit on the outside of the ellipsoidal reflector of an electrohydraulic lithotripter to disturb the generation of diffraction wave at the aperture, but with little effect on the acoustic field inside the reflector.

RESULTS

Although the peak negative pressures at the lithotripter focus using the edge extender at 20 kV were similar to that of the original configuration (-11.1 ± 0.9 vs -10.6 ± 0.7 MPa), the duration of the tensile wave was shortened significantly (3.2 ± 0.54 vs 5.83 ± 0.56 μs, P<0.01). There is no difference, however, in both the amplitude and duration of the compressive shockwaves between these two configurations as well as the -6 dB beam width in the focal plane. The significant suppression effect of bubble cavitation was confirmed by the measured bubble collapse time using passive cavitation detection. At the lithotripter focus, while only about 30 shocks were needed to rupture a blood vessel phantom using the original HM-3 reflector at 20 kV, no damage could be produced after 300 shocks using the edge extender. Meanwhile, the original HM-3 lithotripter at 20 kV can achieve a stone comminution efficiency of 50.4 ± 2.0% on plaster-of-Paris stone phantom after 200 shocks, which is comparable to that of using the edge extender (46.8 ± 4.1%, P=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Modifying the diffraction wave at the lithotripter aperture can suppress the shockwave-induced bubble cavitation with significant reduced damage potential on the vessel phantom but satisfactory stone comminution ability.

A comparison of light spot hydrophone and fiber optic probe hydrophone for lithotripter field characterization

The performance of a newly developed light spot hydrophone (LSHD) in lithotripter field characterization was compared to that of the fiber optic probe hydrophone (FOPH). Pressure waveforms produced by a stable electromagnetic shock wave source were measured by the LSHD and FOPH under identical experimental conditions. In the low energy regime, focus and field acoustic parameters matched well between the two hydrophones. At clinically relevant high energy settings for shock wave lithotripsy, the measured leading compressive pressure waveforms matched closely with each other. However, the LSHD recorded slightly larger |P_| (p < 0.05) and secondary peak compressive pressures (p < 0.01) than the FOPH, leading to about 20% increase in total acoustic pulse energy calculated in a 6 mm radius around the focus (p = 0.06). Tensile pulse durations deviated ~5% (p < 0.01) due to tensile wave shortening from cavitation activity using the LSHD. Intermittent compression spikes and laser light reflection artifacts have been correlated to bubble activity based on simultaneous high-speed imaging analysis. Altogether, both hydrophones are adequate for lithotripter field characterization as specified by the international standard IEC 61846.

Novel instrumentation in urologic surgery: Shock wave lithotripsy

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) was first introduced in 1980 and it rapidly revolutionized the treatment of stone disease. SWL is a non-invasive, outpatient procedure that now accounts for the majority of stone removal procedures. Since the introduction of first generation lithotripter, the Dornier HM3 machine, SWL devices have undergone many modifications secondary to limitations, in efforts to create a more effective and efficient way to treat stones and decrease possible morbidities. Herein, we review the evolution of the technology and advances in the instrumentation over the last three decades.

Shock wave technology and application: an update

CONTEXT

The introduction of new lithotripters has increased problems associated with shock wave application. Recent studies concerning mechanisms of stone disintegration, shock wave focusing, coupling, and application have appeared that may address some of these problems.

OBJECTIVE

To present a consensus with respect to the physics and techniques used by urologists, physicists, and representatives of European lithotripter companies.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We reviewed recent literature (PubMed, Embase, Medline) that focused on the physics of shock waves, theories of stone disintegration, and studies on optimising shock wave application. In addition, we used relevant information from a consensus meeting of the German Society of Shock Wave Lithotripsy.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Besides established mechanisms describing initial fragmentation (tear and shear forces, spallation, cavitation, quasi-static squeezing), the model of dynamic squeezing offers new insight in stone comminution. Manufacturers have modified sources to either enlarge the focal zone or offer different focal sizes. The efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) can be increased by lowering the pulse rate to 60-80 shock waves/min and by ramping the shock wave energy. With the water cushion, the quality of coupling has become a critical factor that depends on the amount, viscosity, and temperature of the gel. Fluoroscopy time can be reduced by automated localisation or the use of optical and acoustic tracking systems. There is a trend towards larger focal zones and lower shock wave pressures.

CONCLUSIONS

New theories for stone disintegration favour the use of shock wave sources with larger focal zones. Use of slower pulse rates, ramping strategies, and adequate coupling of the shock wave head can significantly increase the efficacy and safety of ESWL.

Shock wave lithotripsy: advances in technology and technique

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the only noninvasive method for stone removal. Once considered as a primary option for the treatment of virtually all stones, SWL is now recognized to have important limitations that restrict its use. In particular, the effectiveness of SWL is severely limited by stone burden, and treatment with shock waves carries the risk of acute injury with the potential for long-term adverse effects. Research aiming to characterize the renal response to shock waves and to determine the mechanisms of shock wave action in stone breakage and renal injury has begun to suggest new treatment strategies to improve success rates and safety. Urologists can achieve better outcomes by treating at slower shock wave rate using a step-wise protocol. The aim is to achieve stone comminution using as few shock waves and at as low a power level as possible. Important challenges remain, including the need to improve acoustic coupling, enhance stone targeting, better determine when stone breakage is complete, and minimize the occurrence of residual stone fragments. New technologies have begun to address many of these issues, and hold considerable promise for the future.

Lithotripsy

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the process of fragmentation of renal or ureteric stones by the use of repetitive shock waves generated outside the body and focused onto the stone. Following its introduction in 1980, SWL revolutionized the treatment of kidney stones by offering patients a non-invasive procedure. It is now seen as a mature technology and its use is perceived to be routine. It is noteworthy that, at the time of its introduction, there was a great effort to discover the mechanism(s) by which it works, and the type of sound field that is optimal. Although nearly three decades of subsequent research have increased the knowledge base significantly, the mechanisms are still controversial. Furthermore there is a growing body of evidence that SWL results in injury to the kidney which may have long-term side effects, such as new onset hypertension, although again there is much controversy within the field. Currently, use of lithotripsy is waning, particularly with the advent of minimally invasive ureteroscopic approaches. The goal here is to review the state of the art in SWL and to present the barriers and challenges that need to be addressed for SWL to deliver on its initial promise of a safe, effective, non-invasive treatment for kidney stones.

Treatment protocols to reduce renal injury during shock wave lithotripsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Growing concern over the acute and long-term adverse effects associated with shock wave lithotripsy calls for treatment strategies to reduce renal injury and improve the efficiency of stone breakage in shock wave lithotripsy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Experimental studies in the pig model show that lithotripter settings for power and shock wave rate and the sequence of shock wave delivery can be used to reduce trauma to the kidney. Step-wise power ramping as is often used to acclimate the patient to shock waves causes less tissue trauma when the initial dose is followed by a brief (3-4 min) pause in shock wave delivery. Slowing the firing rate of the lithotripter to 60 shock waves/min or slower is also effective in reducing renal injury and has the added benefit of improving stone breakage outcomes. Neither strategy to reduce renal injury -- not power ramping with 'pause-protection' nor delivering shock waves at reduced shock wave rate --- have been tested in clinical trials.

SUMMARY

Technique in lithotripsy is critically important, and it is encouraging that simple, practical steps can be taken to improve the safety and efficacy of shock wave lithotripsy.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy at 60 shock waves/min reduces renal injury in a porcine model

OBJECTIVE

To determine if extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) at 60 shock waves (SWs)/min reduces renal damage and haemodynamic impairment compared to treatment at 120 SWs/min.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One kidney in each of 19 juvenile pigs (7-8 weeks old) was treated at 120 or at 60 SWs/min (2000 SWs, 24 kV) with an unmodified HM-3 lithotripter (Dornier Medical Systems, Kennesaw, GA, USA). Renal function was determined before and after ESWL treatment by inulin clearance, extraction and clearance of para-aminohippuric acid. Both kidneys were then removed to measure parenchymal lesion size by sectioning the entire kidney and quantifying the size of the haemorrhagic lesion in each slice.

RESULTS

ESWL at 60 SWs/min significantly reduced the size of the acute morphological lesion compared to 120 SWs/min (0.42% vs 3.93% of functional renal volume, P = 0.011) and blunted the decrease in glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow normally seen after treatment at 120 SWs/min.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment at a firing rate of 60 SWs/min produces less morphological injury and causes less alteration in renal haemodynamics than treatment at 120 SWs/min in the pig model of ESWL-induced renal injury.

Effect of firing rate on the performance of shock wave lithotriptors

OBJECTIVE

To determine the mechanism that underlies the effect of shock wave (SW) rate on the performance of clinical lithotripters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The effect of firing rate on the pressure characteristics of SWs was assessed using a fibre-optic probe hydrophone (FOPH 500, RP Acoustics, Leutenbach, Germany). Shock waves were fired at slow (5-27 SW/min) and fast (100-120 SW/min) rates using a conventional high-pressure lithotriptor (DoLi-50, Dornier MedTech America, Inc., Kennesaw, GA, USA), and a new low-pressure lithotriptor (XX-ES, Xi Xin Medical Instruments Co. Ltd, Suzhou, PRC). A digital camcorder (HDR-HC3, Sony, Japan) was used to record cavitation fields, and an ultrafast multiframe high-speed camera (Imacon 200, DRS Data & Imaging Systems, Inc., Oakland, NJ, USA) was used to follow the evolution of bubbles throughout the cavitation cycle.

RESULTS

Firing rate had little effect on the leading positive-pressure phase of the SWs with the DoLi lithotriptor. A slight reduction ( approximately 7%) of peak positive pressure (P+) was detected only in the very dense cavitation fields (approximately 1000 bubbles/cm(3)) generated at the fastest firing rate (120 SW/min) in nondegassed water. The negative pressure of the SWs, on the other hand, was dramatically affected by firing rate. At 120 SW/min the peak negative pressure was reduced by approximately 84%, the duration and area of the negative pressure component was reduced by approximately 80% and approximately 98%, respectively, and the energy density of negative pressure was reduced by >99%. Whereas cavitation bubbles proliferated at fast firing rates, HS-camera images showed the bubbles that persisted between SWs were very small (<10 microm). Similar results were obtained with the XX-ES lithotriptor but only after recognizing a rate-dependent charging artefact with that machine.

CONCLUSION

Increasing the firing rate of a lithotriptor can dramatically reduce the negative pressure component of the SWs, while the positive pressure remains virtually unaffected. Cavitation increases as the firing rate is increased but as the bubbles collapse, they break into numerous microbubbles that, because of their very small size, do not pose a barrier to the leading positive pressure of the next SW. These findings begin to explain why stone breakage in SWL becomes less efficient as the firing rate is increased.

The acute and long-term adverse effects of shock wave lithotripsy

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) has proven to be a highly effective treatment for the removal of kidney stones. Shock waves (SWs) can be used to break most stone types, and because lithotripsy is the only noninvasive treatment for urinary stones, SWL is particularly attractive. On the downside SWL can cause vascular trauma to the kidney and surrounding organs. This acute SW damage can be severe, can lead to scarring with a permanent loss of functional renal volume, and has been linked to potentially serious long-term adverse effects. A recent retrospective study linking lithotripsy to the development of diabetes mellitus has further focused attention on the possibility that SWL may lead to life-altering chronic effects. Thus, it appears that what was once considered to be an entirely safe means to eliminate renal stones can elicit potentially severe unintended consequences. The purpose of this review is to put these findings in perspective. The goal is to explain the factors that influence the severity of SWL injury, update current understanding of the long-term consequences of SW damage, describe the physical mechanisms thought to cause SWL injury, and introduce treatment protocols to improve stone breakage and reduce tissue damage.