Treatment options for active removal of renal stones

References

• Holmes, S.A., Whitfield, H.N., 1991, The current status of lithotripsy. British journal of urology, 68, 337–344.
   Google Scholar
• Rassweiler, J., Tailly, G., Chaussy, C., 2005, Progress in lithotriptor technology. European Urology Update Series, 3, 17–36.
   Google Scholar
• Chaussy, C., Schmiedt, E., Jocham, D., Brendel, W., Forssmann, B., Walther, V., 1982, First clinical experience with extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves. The Journal of urology, 127, 417–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerbl, K., Rehman, J., Landman, J., Lee, D., Sundaram, C., Clayman, R.V., 2002, Current management of urolithiasis: progress or regress? Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 16, 281–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleveland, R., McAteer, J., A.D. Smith, G.H. Badlani, D.H. Bagley, R.V. Clayman, S.G. Docimo, G.H. Jordan, L.R. Kavoussi, B.R. Lee, J.E. Lingeman, G.M. Preminger and J.W. Segura (Eds) 2007, The physics of shock wave lithotripsy. In: Smiths Textbook of Endourology (Hamilton, Ontario: BC Decker), pp.317–332.
   Google Scholar
• Rassweiler, J.J., Knoll, T., Köhrmann, K.U., McAteer, J.A., Lingeman, J.E., Cleveland, R.O., Bailey, M.R., Chaussy, C., 2011, Shock wave technology and application: an update. European urology, 59, 784–796.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delius, M., Brendel, W., Heine, G., 1988, A mechanism of gallstone destruction by extracorporeal shock waves. Die Naturwissenschaften, 75, 200–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou, Y., Cocks, F.H., Preminger, G.M., Zhong, P., 2004, Innovations in shock wave lithotripsy technology: updates in experimental studies. The Journal of urology, 172, 1892–1898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, N., Müller, H.M., Gulhan, A., Sohn, M., Deutz, F.J., Rübben, H., Lutzeyer, W., 1988, Cavitation effects: Possible cause of tissue injury during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Journal of Endourology, 2, 215–220.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenmenger, W., 2001, The mechanisms of stone fragmentation in ESWL. Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 27, 683–693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleveland, R.O., Sapozhnikov, O.A., 2005, Modeling elastic wave propagation in kidney stones with application to shock wave lithotripsy. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118, 2667–2676.
   Google Scholar
• Lokhandwalla, M., Sturtevant, B., 2000, Fracture mechanics model of stone comminution in ESWL and implications for tissue damage. Physics in medicine and biology, 45, 1923–1940.
   Google Scholar
• Orkisz, M., Farchtchian, T., Saighi, D., Bourlion, M., Thiounn, N., Gimenez, G., Debré, B., Flam, T.A., 1998, Image based renal stone tracking to improve efficacy in extracorporeal lithotripsy. The Journal of urology, 160, 1237–1240.
   Google Scholar
• Chang, C.C., Liang, S.M., Pu, Y.R., Chen, C.H., Manousakas, I., Chen, T.S., Kuo, C.L., Yu, F.M., Chu, Z.F., 2001, In vitro study of ultrasound based real-time tracking of renal stones for shock wave lithotripsy: part 1. The Journal of urology, 166, 28–32.
   Google Scholar
• Chuong, C.J., Zhong, P., Preminger, G.M., 1992, A comparison of stone damage caused by different modes of shock wave generation. The Journal of urology, 148, 200–205.
   Google Scholar
• Teichman, J.M., Portis, A.J., Cecconi, P.P., Bub, W.L., Endicott, R.C., Denes, B., Pearle, M.S., Clayman, R.V., 2000, In vitro comparison of shock wave lithotripsy machines. The Journal of urology, 164, 1259–1264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granz, B., Köhler, G., 1992, What makes a shock wave efficient in lithotripsy? The Journal of stone disease, 4, 123–128.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cleveland, R.O., Anglade, R., Babayan, R.K., 2004, Effect of stone motion on in vitro comminution efficiency of Storz Modulith SLX. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 18, 629–633.
   Google Scholar
• Evan, A.P., McAteer, J.A., Connors, B.A., Pishchalnikov, Y.A., Handa, R.K., Blomgren, P., Willis, L.R., Williams, J.C. Jr., Lingeman, J.E., Gao, S., 2008, Independent assessment of a wide-focus, low-pressure electromagnetic lithotripter: absence of renal bioeffects in the pig. BJU international, 101, 382–388.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenmenger, W., Du, X.X., Tang, C., Zhao, S., Wang, Y., Rong, F., Dai, D., Guan, M., Qi, A., 2002, The first clinical results of “wide-focus and low-pressure” ESWL. Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 28, 769–774.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiksell, H., Kinn, A.C., 1995, Implications of cavitation phenomena for shot intervals in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. British journal of urology, 75, 720–723.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pishchalnikov, Y.A., Sapozhnikov, O.A., Bailey, M.R., Pishchalnikova, I.V., Williams, J.C., McAteer, J.A., 2005, Cavitation selectively reduces the negative-pressure phase of lithotripter shock pulses. Acoustics research letters online: ARLO, 6, 280–286.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sokolov, D.L., Bailey, M.R., Crum, L.A., 2001, Use of a dual-pulse lithotripter to generate a localized and intensified cavitation field. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 1685–1695.
   Google Scholar
• Sokolov, D.L., Bailey, M.R., Crum, L.A., 2003, Dual-pulse lithotripter accelerates stone fragmentation and reduces cell lysis in vitro. Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 29, 1045–1052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey, M.R., Cleveland, R.O., Sapozhnikov, O.A., McAteer, J.A., Williams, J.C. Jr., Crum, L.A., 1999, Effect of increased ambient pressure on lithotripsy-induced cavitation in bulk fluid and at solid surfaces J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 105, 1267–1267.
   Google Scholar
• Bohris, C., 2010, Quality of coupling in ESWL significantly affects the disintegration capacityhow to achieve good coupling with ultra- sound gel. In: C. Chaussy, G. Haupt, D. Jocham and K.U. Koehrmann (Eds) Therapeutic Energy Applications in Urology II: Standards and Recent Developments. (Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme), pp. 61–64.
   Google Scholar
• Neucks, J.S., Pishchalnikov, Y.A., Zancanaro, A.J., VonDerHaar, J.N., Williams, J.C. Jr, McAteer, J.A., 2008, Improved acoustic coupling for shock wave lithotripsy. Urological research, 36, 61–66.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J.C. Jr, Woodward, J.F., Stonehill, M.A., Evan, A.P., McAteer, J.A., 1999, Cell damage by lithotripter shock waves at high pressure to preclude cavitation. Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 25, 1445–1449.
   Google Scholar
• Delius, M., 1997, Minimal static excess pressure minimises the effect of extracorporeal shock waves on cells and reduces it on gallstones. Ultrasound in medicine & biology, 23, 611–617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evan, A.P., Willis, L.R., McAteer, J.A., Bailey, M.R., Connors, B.A., Shao, Y., Lingeman, J.E., Williams, J.C. Jr, Fineberg, N.S., Crum, L.A., 2002, Kidney damage and renal functional changes are minimized by waveform control that suppresses cavitation in shock wave lithotripsy The Journal of urology, 168, 1556–1562.
   Google Scholar
• Abdel-Razzak, O.M., Bagley, D.H., 1992, Clinical experience with flexible ureteropyeloscopy. The Journal of urology, 148, 1788–1792.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagley, D.H., 1993, Intrarenal access with the flexible ureteropyeloscope: effects of active and passive tip deflection. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 7, 221–224.
   Google Scholar
• Rajamahanty, S., Grasso, M., 2008, Flexible ureteroscopy update: indications, instrumentation and technical advances. Indian journal of urology: IJU: journal of the Urological Society of India, 24, 532–537.
   Google Scholar
• Buscarini, M., Conlin, M., 2008, Update on flexible ureteroscopy. Urologia internationalis, 80, 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson, R.G., Conlin, M.J., Bagley, D.H., 2005, Ureteric access with flexible ureteroscopes: effect of the size of the ureteroscope. BJU international, 95, 1043–1044.
   Google Scholar
• Wendt-Nordahl, G., Trojan, L., Alken, P., Michel, M.S., Knoll, T., 2007, Ureteroscopy for stone treatment using new 270 degrees semiflexible endoscope: in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical application. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 21, 1439–1444.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, G.B., Portela, D., Grasso, M., 2006, Advanced ureteroscopy: wireless and sheathless. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 20, 552–555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ankem, M.K., Lowry, P.S., Slovick, R.W., Munoz del Rio, A., Nakada, S.Y., 2004, Clinical utility of dual active deflection flexible ureteroscope during upper tract ureteropyeloscopy. Urology, 64, 430–434.
   Google Scholar
• Seto, C., Ishiura, Y., Egawa, M., Komatsu, K., Namiki, M., 2006, Durability of working channel in flexible ureteroscopes when inserting ureteroscopic devices. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 20, 223–226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoznek, A., De Laet, K., Paul, A., de la Taille, A., Salomon, L., Yiou, R., Vordos, D., Abbou, C.C., 2009, Use and maintenance of laser fibers during flexible ureterorenoscopy. (Creteil, France). EAU Video Journal, January 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Traxer, O., Dubosq, F., Jamali, K., Gattegno, B., Thibault, P., 2006, New-generation flexible ureterorenoscopes are more durable than previous ones. Urology, 68, 276–9; discussion 280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Türk, C., Knoll, T., Petrik, A., Sarica, K., Seitz, C., Straub, M., Traxer, O., 2010, EAU guidelines on urolithiasis. Available online at: http://www.uroweb.org/?id=217&tyid=1 (last accessed on 1 August 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Bapat, S.S., Pai, K.V., Purnapatre, S.S., Yadav, P.B., Padye, A.S., 2007, Comparison of holmium laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in managing upper-ureteral stones. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 21, 1425–1427.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wollin, T.A., Denstedt, J.D., 1998, The holmium laser in urology. Journal of clinical laser medicine & surgery, 16, 13–20.
   Google Scholar
• Türk, C., Knoll, T., Petrik, A., Sarica, K., Straub, M., Seitz, C., 2011, EAU guidelines on urolithiasis 2011. Available online at: http://www.uroweb.org/?id=217&tyid=1 (last accessed on 1 August 2011).
   Google Scholar
• Gupta, P.K., 2007, Is the holmium:YAG laser the best intracorporeal lithotripter for the ureter? A 3-year retrospective study. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 21, 305–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kourambas, J., Byrne, R.R., Preminger, G.M., 2001, Does a ureteral access sheath facilitate ureteroscopy? The Journal of urology, 165, 789–793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuster, T.G., Hollenbeck, B.K., Faerber, G.J., Wolf, J.S. Jr, 2002, Ureteroscopic treatment of lower pole calculi: comparison of lithotripsy in situ and after displacement. The Journal of urology, 168, 43–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lobik, L., Lopez-Pujals, A., Leveillee, R.J., 2003, Variables affecting deflection of a new third-generation flexible ureteropyeloscope (DUR-8 elite). Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 17, 733–736.
   Google Scholar
• Hosking, D.H., McColm, S.E., Smith, W.E., 1999, Is stenting following ureteroscopy for removal of distal ureteral calculi necessary? The Journal of urology, 161, 48–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rane, A., Cahill, D., Larner, T., Saleemi, A., Tiptaft, R., 2000, To stent or not to stent? That is still the question. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 14, 479–481.
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, R.R., Auge, B.K., Kourambas, J., Munver, R., Delvecchio, F., Preminger, G.M., 2002, Routine ureteral stenting is not necessary after ureteroscopy and ureteropyeloscopy: a randomized trial. Journal of endourology / Endourological Society, 16, 9–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah, H.N., 2008, Retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower pole renal calculi smaller than one centimeter. Indian journal of urology: IJU: journal of the Urological Society of India, 24, 544–550.
   Google Scholar
• Pearle, M.S., Lingeman, J.E., Leveillee, R., Kuo, R., Preminger, G.M., Nadler, R.B., Macaluso, J., Monga, M., Kumar, U., Dushinski, J., Albala, D.M., Wolf, J.S. Jr., Assimos, D., Fabrizio, M., Munch, L.C., Nakada, S.Y., Auge, B., Honey, J., Ogan, K., Pattaras, J., McDouball, E.M., Averch, T.D., Turk, T., Pietrow, P., Watkins, S., 2005, Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less The Journal of urology, 173, 2005–2009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cocuzza, M., Colombo, J.R. Jr, Ganpule, A., Turna, B., Cocuzza, A., Dhawan, D., Santos, B., et al.2009, Combined retrograde flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy with holmium YAG laser for renal calculi associated with ipsilateral ureteral stones Journal of endourology/ Endourological Society, 23, 253–257.
   Google Scholar
• Perlmutter, A.E., Talug, C., Tarry, W.F., Zaslau, S., Mohseni, H., Kandzari, S.J., 2008, Impact of stone location on success rates of endoscopic lithotripsy for nephrolithiasis. Urology, 71, 214–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kourambas, J., Delvecchio, F.C., Munver, R., Preminger, G.M., 2000, Nitinol stone retrieval-assisted ureteroscopic management of lower pole renal calculi. Urology, 56, 935–939.
   Google Scholar
• Lotan, Y., Gettman, M.T., Roehrborn, C.G., Cadeddu, J.A., Pearle, M.S., 2002, Management of ureteral calculi: a cost comparison and decision making analysis. The Journal of urology, 167, 1621–1629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar