Author:
Cho Sung Yong,Park Hyeji,Park Jae Suk,Kim Seong Chan,Kwon Oh bin,Song Hyun jae,Choi Min Joo
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This work aimed to identify a method to achieve improved stone targeting and safety in shockwave lithotripsy by accounting for respiration.
Methods
We set up an electromotive device simulating renal movement during respiration to place artificial stones within the phantom gel, measuring stone weight changes before and after shockwave exposure and the cavitation damage. We conducted clinical trials using respiratory masks and sensors to monitor and analyze patient respiration during shockwave lithotripsy.
Results
The in vitro efficiency of lithotripsy was higher when adjusted for respiration than when respiration was not adjusted for. Slow respiration showed the best efficiency with higher hit rates when not adjusted for respiration. Cavitation damage was also lowest during slow respiration. The clinical study included 52 patients. Respiratory regularity was maintained above 90% in regular respiration. When respiration was regular, the lithotripsy rate was about 65.6%, which stayed at about 40% when respiration was irregular. During the lithotripsy, the participants experienced various events, such as sleep, taking off their masks, talking, movement, coughing, pain, nervousness, and hyperventilation. The generation of shockwaves based on respiratory regularity could reduce pain in patients.
Conclusion
These results suggest a more accurate lithotripsy should be performed according to respiratory regularity.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference24 articles.
1. Yoon JH, Park S, Kim SC, Park S, Moon KH, Cheon SH, et al. Outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones according to ESWL intensity. Translational Androl Urol. 2021;10(4):1588. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau-20-1397.
2. Kim CH, Chung DY, Rha KH, Lee JY, Lee SH. Effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina. 2020;57(1):26. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina57010026.
3. Kang DH, Cho KS, Ham WS, Lee H, Kwon JK, Choi YD, et al. Comparison of high, intermediate, and low frequency shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease: systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(7):e0158661. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158661.
4. Liu C, Zheng S. Application of self-controlled breathing technique in respiratory gating that triggers the shockwave for lithotripsy of urinary calculi. Di 1 Jun Yi da xue xue bao = academic. J First Med Coll PLA. 2003;23(5):504–6. https://europepmc.org/article/med/12754147.
5. Legrand F, Roumeguère T. Medical complications of extracorporeal lithotripsy. Rev Med Brux. 2013;34(3):163–9. https://europepmc.org/article/med/23951856.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献