Shock wave lithotripsy: Advances in technology and technique

James E. Lingéman, James A. McAteer, Ehud Gnessin, Andrew Evan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

114 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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 bégun to address many of these issues, and hold considerable promise for the future.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)660-670
Number of pages11
JournalNature Reviews Urology
Volume6
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2009

Fingerprint

Lithotripsy
Technology
Kidney
Wounds and Injuries
Acoustics
Therapeutics
Safety
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Shock wave lithotripsy : Advances in technology and technique. / Lingéman, James E.; McAteer, James A.; Gnessin, Ehud; Evan, Andrew.

In: Nature Reviews Urology, Vol. 6, No. 12, 12.2009, p. 660-670.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lingéman, James E. ; McAteer, James A. ; Gnessin, Ehud ; Evan, Andrew. / Shock wave lithotripsy : Advances in technology and technique. In: Nature Reviews Urology. 2009 ; Vol. 6, No. 12. pp. 660-670.
@article{249d39f1d2414888a6d8591b9d9cbe17,
title = "Shock wave lithotripsy: Advances in technology and technique",
abstract = "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 b{\'e}gun to address many of these issues, and hold considerable promise for the future.",
author = "Ling{\'e}man, {James E.} and McAteer, {James A.} and Ehud Gnessin and Andrew Evan",
year = "2009",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1038/nrurol.2009.216",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "660--670",
journal = "Nature Reviews Urology",
issn = "1759-4812",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Shock wave lithotripsy

T2 - Advances in technology and technique

AU - Lingéman, James E.

AU - McAteer, James A.

AU - Gnessin, Ehud

AU - Evan, Andrew

PY - 2009/12

Y1 - 2009/12

N2 - 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 bégun to address many of these issues, and hold considerable promise for the future.

AB - 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 bégun to address many of these issues, and hold considerable promise for the future.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=75149196453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=75149196453&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/nrurol.2009.216

DO - 10.1038/nrurol.2009.216

M3 - Article

C2 - 19956196

AN - SCOPUS:75149196453

VL - 6

SP - 660

EP - 670

JO - Nature Reviews Urology

JF - Nature Reviews Urology

SN - 1759-4812

IS - 12

ER -