Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL

James A. McAteer, Andrew Evan, Bret A. Connors, Yuri A. Pishchalnikov, James Williams, James E. Lingeman

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Here we provide a capsule summary of key observations showing that adverse effects can be reduced and stone breakage outcomes can be improved by the choice of the treatment protocol used in SWL. The take home message is-technique in lithotripsy can be used to significant advantage. SW-rate is key, and so is the sequence of SW delivery. Patient studies have shown that stone breakage is significantly improved at 60SW/min compared to a rate of 120SW/min, and laboratory experiments with pigs show that acute SWL injury to the kidney can be reduced dramatically by further slowing the SW firing rate to 30SW/min. The sequence of SW administration has a profound effect on the kidney, and renal injury is significantly reduced when the treatment protocol incorporates a priming dose of SW's followed by a brief pause before treatment is resumed. Continued developments in lithotripsy technology are welcome and will hopefully lead to improved SWL systems. Current experience suggests, however, that technology is not a substitute for expert technique, and attention to the fundamentals of SW delivery is essential to achieve the best possible outcomes regardless of the lithotripter at hand.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationAIP Conference Proceedings
Pages243-248
Number of pages6
Volume1049
DOIs
StatePublished - 2008
Event2nd International Urolithiasis Research Symposium - Indianapolis, IN, United States
Duration: Apr 17 2008Apr 18 2008

Other

Other2nd International Urolithiasis Research Symposium
CountryUnited States
CityIndianapolis, IN
Period4/17/084/18/08

Fingerprint

kidneys
rocks
delivery
priming
swine
capsules
messages
substitutes
dosage

Keywords

  • Animal models
  • Kidney
  • Kidney stones
  • Shock wave lithotripsy
  • Trauma

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physics and Astronomy(all)

Cite this

McAteer, J. A., Evan, A., Connors, B. A., Pishchalnikov, Y. A., Williams, J., & Lingeman, J. E. (2008). Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1049, pp. 243-248) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2998030

Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL. / McAteer, James A.; Evan, Andrew; Connors, Bret A.; Pishchalnikov, Yuri A.; Williams, James; Lingeman, James E.

AIP Conference Proceedings. Vol. 1049 2008. p. 243-248.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

McAteer, JA, Evan, A, Connors, BA, Pishchalnikov, YA, Williams, J & Lingeman, JE 2008, Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL. in AIP Conference Proceedings. vol. 1049, pp. 243-248, 2nd International Urolithiasis Research Symposium, Indianapolis, IN, United States, 4/17/08. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2998030
McAteer JA, Evan A, Connors BA, Pishchalnikov YA, Williams J, Lingeman JE. Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL. In AIP Conference Proceedings. Vol. 1049. 2008. p. 243-248 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2998030
McAteer, James A. ; Evan, Andrew ; Connors, Bret A. ; Pishchalnikov, Yuri A. ; Williams, James ; Lingeman, James E. / Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL. AIP Conference Proceedings. Vol. 1049 2008. pp. 243-248
@inproceedings{a57a6db2d1344b67a945c42271c486ff,
title = "Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL",
abstract = "Here we provide a capsule summary of key observations showing that adverse effects can be reduced and stone breakage outcomes can be improved by the choice of the treatment protocol used in SWL. The take home message is-technique in lithotripsy can be used to significant advantage. SW-rate is key, and so is the sequence of SW delivery. Patient studies have shown that stone breakage is significantly improved at 60SW/min compared to a rate of 120SW/min, and laboratory experiments with pigs show that acute SWL injury to the kidney can be reduced dramatically by further slowing the SW firing rate to 30SW/min. The sequence of SW administration has a profound effect on the kidney, and renal injury is significantly reduced when the treatment protocol incorporates a priming dose of SW's followed by a brief pause before treatment is resumed. Continued developments in lithotripsy technology are welcome and will hopefully lead to improved SWL systems. Current experience suggests, however, that technology is not a substitute for expert technique, and attention to the fundamentals of SW delivery is essential to achieve the best possible outcomes regardless of the lithotripter at hand.",
keywords = "Animal models, Kidney, Kidney stones, Shock wave lithotripsy, Trauma",
author = "McAteer, {James A.} and Andrew Evan and Connors, {Bret A.} and Pishchalnikov, {Yuri A.} and James Williams and Lingeman, {James E.}",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1063/1.2998030",
language = "English",
isbn = "9780735405776",
volume = "1049",
pages = "243--248",
booktitle = "AIP Conference Proceedings",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Treatment protocols to reduce injury and improve stone breakage in SWL

AU - McAteer, James A.

AU - Evan, Andrew

AU - Connors, Bret A.

AU - Pishchalnikov, Yuri A.

AU - Williams, James

AU - Lingeman, James E.

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - Here we provide a capsule summary of key observations showing that adverse effects can be reduced and stone breakage outcomes can be improved by the choice of the treatment protocol used in SWL. The take home message is-technique in lithotripsy can be used to significant advantage. SW-rate is key, and so is the sequence of SW delivery. Patient studies have shown that stone breakage is significantly improved at 60SW/min compared to a rate of 120SW/min, and laboratory experiments with pigs show that acute SWL injury to the kidney can be reduced dramatically by further slowing the SW firing rate to 30SW/min. The sequence of SW administration has a profound effect on the kidney, and renal injury is significantly reduced when the treatment protocol incorporates a priming dose of SW's followed by a brief pause before treatment is resumed. Continued developments in lithotripsy technology are welcome and will hopefully lead to improved SWL systems. Current experience suggests, however, that technology is not a substitute for expert technique, and attention to the fundamentals of SW delivery is essential to achieve the best possible outcomes regardless of the lithotripter at hand.

AB - Here we provide a capsule summary of key observations showing that adverse effects can be reduced and stone breakage outcomes can be improved by the choice of the treatment protocol used in SWL. The take home message is-technique in lithotripsy can be used to significant advantage. SW-rate is key, and so is the sequence of SW delivery. Patient studies have shown that stone breakage is significantly improved at 60SW/min compared to a rate of 120SW/min, and laboratory experiments with pigs show that acute SWL injury to the kidney can be reduced dramatically by further slowing the SW firing rate to 30SW/min. The sequence of SW administration has a profound effect on the kidney, and renal injury is significantly reduced when the treatment protocol incorporates a priming dose of SW's followed by a brief pause before treatment is resumed. Continued developments in lithotripsy technology are welcome and will hopefully lead to improved SWL systems. Current experience suggests, however, that technology is not a substitute for expert technique, and attention to the fundamentals of SW delivery is essential to achieve the best possible outcomes regardless of the lithotripter at hand.

KW - Animal models

KW - Kidney

KW - Kidney stones

KW - Shock wave lithotripsy

KW - Trauma

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=54049099318&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=54049099318&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1063/1.2998030

DO - 10.1063/1.2998030

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 9780735405776

VL - 1049

SP - 243

EP - 248

BT - AIP Conference Proceedings

ER -