International Urology and Nephrology

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 617–621 | Cite as

Shock wave lithotripsy of urinary calculi with Lithocut C-3000 in a small center

  • L. Daehlin
  • M. Hellang
  • N. M. Ulvik


We report clinical results with the Lithocut C-3000 shock wave lithotriptor used in treatment of kidney and ureteral stones. The Lithocut C-3000 is a low-cost device. There is no need for anaesthesia. The overall success rate after 3 months was 64% in 143 treatment sessions of 120 stones. For small stones (diameter<10 mm), the success rate was 69% and for stones with a diameter≥10 mm, success was achieved in 60%. The treatment-associated morbidity was low. The Lithocut C-3000 device appears to be safe and effective, suitable for small centers.


Shock Wave Shock Wave Lithotripsy International Urology Ureteral Stone Urinary Calculus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chaussy, C., Schmiedt, E., Joacham, D., Brendel, W., Forssman, B., Walther, V.: First clinical experiences with extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves.J. Urol., 127, 417 (1982).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bierkens, A. F., Hendrikx, A. M. J., deKort, V. J. W., deReyke, T., Bruynen, C. A. H., Bouve, E. R., Beek, T. V. D., Vos, P., Berkel, H. V.: Efficacy of second 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. Urol., 148, 1052 (1992).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eisenberger, E., Schmidt, A.: ESWL and the future of stone management.World J. Urol., 11, 2 (1993).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grabe, M., Kinn, A.-C., Ahlgren, G., Carbin, B.-E.: Treatment of renal and ureteral stones with Lithocut C-3000 lithotriptor.J. Endourol., 6, 403 (1992).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rajagopal, V., Bailey, M. J.: Mobile extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy.Br. J. Urol., 67, 6 (1991).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Simon, D.: Experience with 500 extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy patients using a low-cost unit: the “Econolith”.J. Endourol., 9, 215 (1995).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carlsson, P., Petterson, S., Tiselius, H.-G.: A cost-effectiveness analysis of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol., 23 (Suppl. 122), 44 (1989).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grasso, M., Beaghler, M., Loisides, P.: The case for primary endoscopic management of upper urinary tract calculi: II. Cost and outcome assessment of 112 primary ureteral calculi.Urology, 45, 372 (1995).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wolf, J. S., Carroll, P. R., Stoller, P. R.: Cost-effectiveness vs. patient preference in the choice of treatment for distal ureteral calculi: A literature-based decision analysis.J. Endourol., 9, 243 (1995).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Daehlin
    • 1
  • M. Hellang
    • 1
  • N. M. Ulvik
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Division of UrologyUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations