Why stones break better at slow shockwave rates than at fast rates

In vitro study with a research electrohydraulic lithotripter

Yuri A. Pishchalnikov, James A. McAteer, James Williams, Irina V. Pishchalnikova, R. Jason Vonderhaar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

73 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Stones break better when the rate of shockwave (SW) delivery is slowed. It has been hypothesized that the greater cavitation accompanying a fast rate shields pulse propagation, thus interfering with the delivery of SW energy to the stone. We tested this idea by correlating waveforms measured at the SW focus with cavitation viewed using high-speed imaging. Materials and Methods: A series of U30 gypsum stones held in a 2-mm mesh basket were exposed to 200 SWs at 30 or 120 SW/min from a research electrohydraulic lithotripter (HM3 clone). Waveforms were collected using a fiberoptic probe hydrophone. High-speed imaging was used to observe cavitation bubbles in the water and at the stone surface. Results: Stone breakage was significantly better at 30 SW/min than at 120 SW/min. The rate had little effect on SW parameters in the water free field. In the presence of particulates released from stones, the positive pressure of the SW remained unaffected, but the trailing tensile phase of the pulse was significantly reduced at 120 SW/min. Conclusions: Cavitation bubbles do not persist between SWs. Thus, mature bubbles from one pulse do not interfere with the next pulse, even at 120 SW/min. However, cavitation nuclei carried by fine particles released from stones can persist between pulses. These nuclei have little effect on the compressive wave but seed cavitation under the influence of the tensile wave. Bubble growth draws energy from the negative-pressure phase of the SW, reducing its amplitude. TMs likely affects the dynamics of cavitation bubble clusters at the stone surface, reducing the effectiveness of bubble action in stone comminution.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)537-541
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Endourology
Volume20
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2006

Fingerprint

Pressure
Calcium Sulfate
Water
Research
Seeds
Clone Cells
Heart Rate
Growth
In Vitro Techniques

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Why stones break better at slow shockwave rates than at fast rates : In vitro study with a research electrohydraulic lithotripter. / Pishchalnikov, Yuri A.; McAteer, James A.; Williams, James; Pishchalnikova, Irina V.; Vonderhaar, R. Jason.

In: Journal of Endourology, Vol. 20, No. 8, 08.2006, p. 537-541.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pishchalnikov, Yuri A. ; McAteer, James A. ; Williams, James ; Pishchalnikova, Irina V. ; Vonderhaar, R. Jason. / Why stones break better at slow shockwave rates than at fast rates : In vitro study with a research electrohydraulic lithotripter. In: Journal of Endourology. 2006 ; Vol. 20, No. 8. pp. 537-541.
@article{102056f5f793427bac701f2cf33103cb,
title = "Why stones break better at slow shockwave rates than at fast rates: In vitro study with a research electrohydraulic lithotripter",
abstract = "Background and Purpose: Stones break better when the rate of shockwave (SW) delivery is slowed. It has been hypothesized that the greater cavitation accompanying a fast rate shields pulse propagation, thus interfering with the delivery of SW energy to the stone. We tested this idea by correlating waveforms measured at the SW focus with cavitation viewed using high-speed imaging. Materials and Methods: A series of U30 gypsum stones held in a 2-mm mesh basket were exposed to 200 SWs at 30 or 120 SW/min from a research electrohydraulic lithotripter (HM3 clone). Waveforms were collected using a fiberoptic probe hydrophone. High-speed imaging was used to observe cavitation bubbles in the water and at the stone surface. Results: Stone breakage was significantly better at 30 SW/min than at 120 SW/min. The rate had little effect on SW parameters in the water free field. In the presence of particulates released from stones, the positive pressure of the SW remained unaffected, but the trailing tensile phase of the pulse was significantly reduced at 120 SW/min. Conclusions: Cavitation bubbles do not persist between SWs. Thus, mature bubbles from one pulse do not interfere with the next pulse, even at 120 SW/min. However, cavitation nuclei carried by fine particles released from stones can persist between pulses. These nuclei have little effect on the compressive wave but seed cavitation under the influence of the tensile wave. Bubble growth draws energy from the negative-pressure phase of the SW, reducing its amplitude. TMs likely affects the dynamics of cavitation bubble clusters at the stone surface, reducing the effectiveness of bubble action in stone comminution.",
author = "Pishchalnikov, {Yuri A.} and McAteer, {James A.} and James Williams and Pishchalnikova, {Irina V.} and Vonderhaar, {R. Jason}",
year = "2006",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1089/end.2006.20.537",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "537--541",
journal = "Journal of Endourology",
issn = "0892-7790",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why stones break better at slow shockwave rates than at fast rates

T2 - In vitro study with a research electrohydraulic lithotripter

AU - Pishchalnikov, Yuri A.

AU - McAteer, James A.

AU - Williams, James

AU - Pishchalnikova, Irina V.

AU - Vonderhaar, R. Jason

PY - 2006/8

Y1 - 2006/8

N2 - Background and Purpose: Stones break better when the rate of shockwave (SW) delivery is slowed. It has been hypothesized that the greater cavitation accompanying a fast rate shields pulse propagation, thus interfering with the delivery of SW energy to the stone. We tested this idea by correlating waveforms measured at the SW focus with cavitation viewed using high-speed imaging. Materials and Methods: A series of U30 gypsum stones held in a 2-mm mesh basket were exposed to 200 SWs at 30 or 120 SW/min from a research electrohydraulic lithotripter (HM3 clone). Waveforms were collected using a fiberoptic probe hydrophone. High-speed imaging was used to observe cavitation bubbles in the water and at the stone surface. Results: Stone breakage was significantly better at 30 SW/min than at 120 SW/min. The rate had little effect on SW parameters in the water free field. In the presence of particulates released from stones, the positive pressure of the SW remained unaffected, but the trailing tensile phase of the pulse was significantly reduced at 120 SW/min. Conclusions: Cavitation bubbles do not persist between SWs. Thus, mature bubbles from one pulse do not interfere with the next pulse, even at 120 SW/min. However, cavitation nuclei carried by fine particles released from stones can persist between pulses. These nuclei have little effect on the compressive wave but seed cavitation under the influence of the tensile wave. Bubble growth draws energy from the negative-pressure phase of the SW, reducing its amplitude. TMs likely affects the dynamics of cavitation bubble clusters at the stone surface, reducing the effectiveness of bubble action in stone comminution.

AB - Background and Purpose: Stones break better when the rate of shockwave (SW) delivery is slowed. It has been hypothesized that the greater cavitation accompanying a fast rate shields pulse propagation, thus interfering with the delivery of SW energy to the stone. We tested this idea by correlating waveforms measured at the SW focus with cavitation viewed using high-speed imaging. Materials and Methods: A series of U30 gypsum stones held in a 2-mm mesh basket were exposed to 200 SWs at 30 or 120 SW/min from a research electrohydraulic lithotripter (HM3 clone). Waveforms were collected using a fiberoptic probe hydrophone. High-speed imaging was used to observe cavitation bubbles in the water and at the stone surface. Results: Stone breakage was significantly better at 30 SW/min than at 120 SW/min. The rate had little effect on SW parameters in the water free field. In the presence of particulates released from stones, the positive pressure of the SW remained unaffected, but the trailing tensile phase of the pulse was significantly reduced at 120 SW/min. Conclusions: Cavitation bubbles do not persist between SWs. Thus, mature bubbles from one pulse do not interfere with the next pulse, even at 120 SW/min. However, cavitation nuclei carried by fine particles released from stones can persist between pulses. These nuclei have little effect on the compressive wave but seed cavitation under the influence of the tensile wave. Bubble growth draws energy from the negative-pressure phase of the SW, reducing its amplitude. TMs likely affects the dynamics of cavitation bubble clusters at the stone surface, reducing the effectiveness of bubble action in stone comminution.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33750620336&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33750620336&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/end.2006.20.537

DO - 10.1089/end.2006.20.537

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 537

EP - 541

JO - Journal of Endourology

JF - Journal of Endourology

SN - 0892-7790

IS - 8

ER -