Advertisement

Urolithiasis

, Volume 46, Issue 6, pp 549–558 | Cite as

Impact of repeated extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy on prepubertal rat kidney

  • Jae Min Chung
  • Bu Kyung Park
  • Jung Hee Kim
  • Hyun Jung Lee
  • Sang Don Lee
Original Paper

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effects of repeated extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) on the kidneys of prepubertal and adult rats. Thirty rats were used: 15 were prepubertal (3 weeks of age) with an average body weight of 72.3 ± 3.3 g, and 15 were adults with of 265 ± 11.3 g. The prepubertal and adult rats were separately and randomly allocated to three groups, each consisting of five rats. Following anesthetization, the left kidney of each rat in each group received shock waves in one, two, or three sessions separated by 72 h. The rats in each group were killed 72 h after the last ESWL session, and both kidneys were harvested; the right kidney was used as the control. Renal injury was examined with histological analysis, immunohistochemistry, and Western blot to detecting the expression of heat-shock protein-70, tumor necrosis factor-alpha-α, intercellular adhesion molecule-1, and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 as markers of renal damage. All of these markers were similarly increased with increased ESWL sessions in both age groups. Histological analysis revealed more serious fibrosis and inflammation in the ESWL-treated kidneys in both groups than in the controls, with the damage increasing with increasing numbers of sessions. ESWL on the kidney increased renal damage according to the number of sessions in both age groups of rats, and the effects of ESWL on renal injury were similar in the two groups. However, there were generally no significant differences in the effects of ESWL on molecular indicators of renal injury between prepubertal and adult rats.

Keywords

Inflammatory renal damage Shock wave Puberty Adult 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology (30-2014-005), Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital.

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

There were no external sources of funding.

Author disclosure statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Conflict of interest

Author Jae Min Chung declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author Bu Kyung Park declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author Jung Hee Kim declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author Hyun Jung Lee declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author Sang Don Lee declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed (PNUIACUC; PNU-2014-0612).

References

  1. 1.
    Goktas C, Coskun A, Bicik Z, Horuz R, Unsal I, Serteser M et al (2012) Evaluating ESWL-induced renal injury based on urinary TNF-a, IL-1a, and IL-6 levels. Urol Res 40:569–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Howard D, Sturtevant B (1997) In vitro study of the mechanical effects of shock-wave lithotripsy. Ultrasound Med Biol 23:1107–1122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aksoy Y, Malkoc I, Atmaca AF, Aksoy H, Altinkaynak K, Akcay F (2006) The effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy on antioxidant enzymes in erythrocytes. Cell Biochem Funct 24:467–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim HJ, Lee JS, Kim A, Koo S, Cha HJ, Han JA et al (2013) TLR2 signaling in tubular epithelial cells regulates NK cell recruitment in kidney ischemia–reperfusion injury. J Immunol 191:2657–2664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heyns CF (2004) Renal trauma: indications for imaging and surgical exploration. BJU Int 93:1165–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li X, Xue Y, He D, Chen X, Zhang L (2010) Shock wave induces chronic renal lesion through activation of the nuclear factor kappa B signaling pathway. World J Urol 28:657–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rassweiler J, Kohrmann KU, Back W, Frohner S, Raab M, Weber A et al (1993) Experimental basis of shockwave-induced renal trauma in the model of the canine kidney. World J Urol 11(1):43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ellerbroek PM, Schoemaker RG, van Veghel R, Hoepelman AI, Coenjaerts FE (2004) Cryptococcal capsular glucuronoxylomannan reduces ischaemia-related neutrophil influx. Eur J Clin Invest 34:631–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Newman DM, Coury T, Lingeman JE, Mertz JH, Mosbaugh PG, Steele RE et al (1986) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy experience in children. J Urol 136(1 Pt 2):238–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Demirkesen O, Onal B, Tansu N, Altintas R, Yalçin V, Oner A (2006) Efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for isolated lower caliceal stones in children compared with stones in other renal locations. Urology 67:170–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    D’Addessi A, Bongiovanni L, Racioppi M, Sacco E, Bassi P (2008) Is extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in pediatrics a safe procedure? J Pediatr Surg 43:591–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Neal DE Jr, Kaack MB, Harmon EP, Puyau F, Morvant A, Richardson et al (1991) Renin production after experimental extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a primate model. J Urol 146:548–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Claro Jde A, Denardi F, Ferreira U, Rodrigues Netto N, Jr Saldanha LB et al (1994) Effects of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy on renal growth and function: an animal model. J Endourol 8:191–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lifshitz DA, Lingeman JE, Zafar FS, Hollensbe DW, Nyhuis AW, Evan AP (1998) Alterations in predicted growth rates of pediatric kidneys treated with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 12:469–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Villányi KK, Székely JG, Farkas LM, Jávor E, Pusztai C (2001) Short-term changes in renal function after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children. J Urol 166:222–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wadhwa P, Aron M, Bal CS, Dhanpatty B, Gupta NP (2007) Critical prospective appraisal of renal morphology and function in children undergoing shockwave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 21:961–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goel MC, Baserge NS, Babu RV, Sinha S, Kapoor R (1996) Pediatric kidney: functional outcome after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 155:2044–2046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lottmann HB, Archambaud F, Traxer O, Mercier-Pageyral B, Helal B (2000) The efficacy and parenchymal consequences of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in infants. BJU Int 85:311–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Picramenos D, Deliveliotis C, Alexopoulou K, Makrichoritis C, Kostakopoulos Dimopoulos C (1996) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones in children. Urol Int 56:86–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Traxer O, Lottmann H, Archambaud F, Helal B, Mercier-Pageyral B (1999) Extracorporeal lithotripsy in children. Study of its efficacy and evaluation of renal parenchymal damage by DMSA-Tc 99m scintigraphy: a series of 39 children. Arch Pediatr 6:251–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomas R, Frentz JM, Harmon E, Frentz GD (1992) Effect of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy on renal function and body height in pediatric patients. J Urol 148:1064–1066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lingeman JE, Kim SC, Kuo RL, McAteer JA, Evan AP (2003) Shockwave lithotripsy: anecdotes and insights. J Endourol 17:687–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Krambeck AE, Gettman MT, Rohlinger AL, Lohse CM, Patterson DE, Segura JW (2006) Diabetes mellitus and hypertension associated with shock wave lithotripsy of renal and proximal ureteral stones at 19 years of follow-up. J Urol 175:1742–1747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Li X, Long Q, Cheng X, He D (2014) Shock wave induces biological renal damage by activating excessive inflammatory responses in rat model. Inflammation 37:1317–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    O’Neill S, Harrison EM, Ross JA, Wigmore SJ, Hughes J (2014) Heat-shock proteins and acute ischaemic kidney injury. Nephron Exp Nephrol 126(4):167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Haller H, Dragun D, Miethke A, Park JK, Weis A, Lippoldt A et al (1996) Antisense oligonucleotides for ICAM-1 attenuate reperfusion injury and renal failure in the rat. Kidney Int 50:473–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tei N, Tanaka J, Sugimoto K, Nishihara T, Nishioka R, Takahashi H et al (2013) Expression of MCP-1 and fractalkine on endothelial cells and astrocytes may contribute to the invasion and migration of brain macrophages in ischemic rat brain lesions. J Neurosci Res 91:681–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Melgarejo E, Medina MA, Sanchez-Jimenez F, Urdiales JL (2009) Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1: a key mediator in inflammatory processes. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 41:998–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ghosh SS, Krieg R, Massey HD, Sica DA, Fakhry I, Ghosh S et al (2012) Curcumin and enalapril ameliorate renal failure by antagonizing inflammation in 5/6 nephrectomized rats: role of phospholipase and cyclooxygenase. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 302:F439–F454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Clark DL, Connors BA, Handa RK, Evan AP (2011) Pretreatment with low-energy shock waves reduces the renal oxidative stress and inflammation caused by high-energy shock wave lithotripsy. Urol Res 39:437–442CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyPusan National University School of MedicineYangsanKorea
  2. 2.Research Institute for Convergence of Biomedical Science and TechnologyPusan National University Yangsan HospitalYangsanKorea
  3. 3.Department of PathologyPusan National University Yangsan HospitalYangsanKorea

Personalised recommendations