Operator experience and adequate anesthesia improve treatment outcome with third-generation lithotripters

被引:23
作者
Eichel, L [1 ]
Batzold, P [1 ]
Erturk, E [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Rochester, Sch Med, Dept Urol, Rochester, NY 14642 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1089/08927790152596217
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: To characterize the effect of operator experience and type of anesthesia on treatment outcome when switching from the Dornier HM3 to the third-generation Dornier U/50 lithotripter. Patients and Methods: A population of 370 consecutive patients treated by 15 urologists was divided into two groups. Group I (N = 225) included patients treated during the initial 3 months with our new lithotripter. Group II (N = 145) included patients treated during the last 3 months. Changes were made during the intervening 6 months in focusing technique, anesthesia type, coupling technique, and shockwave delivery. Information was collected regarding success of stone treatment (defined as complete clearance of stone or fragments < 3 min at 1 month). Results: There were no differences between the two groups with regard to age, sex, fluoroscopic time or maximal shockwave intensity used. Group I had a slightly higher percentage of upper ureteral stones (20% v 13%); however, the difference was not significant. Upper ureteral stones in Group II were on average significantly larger (9.4 min v 7.3 mm; P = 0.003). Intravenous sedation was used frequently in Group I (111 patients; 49%) and not at all in Group II. General anesthesia was used more frequently in Group H than in group I (34% v 24%; P < 0.02). Spinal anesthesia also was utilized more frequently in Group II patients (66% v 28%; P < 0.0001). Overall, general or regional anesthesia was, received by 100% of the patients in Group II but only 52% of the patients in group I. The success rate of stone treatment was much better for Group II than for Group I (78% v 51%; P < 0.0001). Conclusion: The transition from a Dornier HM3 lithotripter to a third-generation lithotripter can be difficult, but if adequate anesthesia is given to minimize patient movement and balloon pressures are optimized, stone targeting can be accurate and similar stone clearance rates can be obtained.
引用
收藏
页码:671 / 673
页数:3
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]   EFFICACY OF 2ND GENERATION LITHOTRIPTORS - A MULTICENTER COMPARATIVE-STUDY OF 2,206 EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY TREATMENTS WITH THE SIEMENS-LITHOSTAR, DORNIER-HM4, WOLF-PIEZOLITH-2300, DIREX-TRIPTER-X-1 AND BREAKSTONE-LITHOTRIPTORS [J].
BIERKENS, AF ;
HENDRIKX, AJM ;
DEKORT, VJW ;
DEREYKE, T ;
BRUYNEN, CAH ;
BOUVE, ER ;
BEEK, TVD ;
VOS, P ;
BERKEL, HV .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1992, 148 (03) :1052-1057
[2]   COMPARISON OF FIRST GENERATION (DORNIER-HM3) AND 2ND GENERATION (MEDSTONE-STS) LITHOTRIPTORS - TREATMENT RESULTS WITH 13,864 RENAL AND URETERAL CALCULI [J].
CASS, AS .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1995, 153 (03) :588-592
[3]   Effectiveness and safety of the Dornier compact lithotriptor: An evaluative multicenter study [J].
Elhilali, MM ;
Stoller, ML ;
McNamara, TC ;
Morehouse, DD ;
Wolf, JS ;
Keeler, LL .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1996, 155 (03) :834-838
[4]  
HOLLANDER JB, 1993, J ENDOUROL, V7, P641
[5]  
LINGEMAN J, 1996, SMITHS TXB ENDOUROLO, P585
[6]  
LINGEMAN J, 1997, UROL CLIN N AM, V24, P205
[7]   EVALUATION OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY WITHOUT ANESTHESIA USING A DORNIER HM3 LITHOTRIPTOR WITHOUT TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS [J].
PETTERSSON, B ;
TISELIUS, HG ;
ANDERSSON, A ;
ERIKSSON, I .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1989, 142 (05) :1189-1192
[8]   THE DORNIER LITHOTRIPTER U-30 - FIRST CLINICAL-EXPERIENCE [J].
SCHMIDT, A ;
VOLZ, C ;
EISENBERGER, F .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 1995, 9 (05) :363-366
[9]   USE OF ALFENTANIL SEDATION ANESTHESIA WITH THE DORNIER HM3 LITHOTRIPTER [J].
SCHOW, DA ;
JACKSON, TL ;
MORRISSEAU, PM ;
TROTTER, SJ ;
HOWE, DC ;
JOHNSON, DL .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 1993, 7 (06) :445-448
[10]   COMPARATIVE-STUDIES OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY BY DORNIER HM3, EDAP LT 01 AND SONOLITH 2000 DEVICES [J].
TAN, EC ;
TUNG, KH ;
FOO, KT .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1991, 146 (02) :294-297