Abstract
Purpose
Using the Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy, urinary stones can be fragmented and removed simultaneously by suction at different selectable suction settings. The aim was to evaluate pressure stability at different settings and test stone fragmentation and suction at the optimal settings.
Methods
In an ex vivo porcine kidney model, we recorded intrarenal pressure levels with different suction levels. Storz® Nephroscopes MIP-M and MIP-L and Swiss LithoClast® Trilogy probes were used.
Results
Pressure stabilized at 19 cm H2O with the MIP-M at 1 m gravity irrigation with no instrument introduced. After inserting the 1.5 mm probe, the pressure dropped to 5 cm H2O. With a suction setting of 10%, the pressure stabilized at 3 cm H2O and remained stable for the maximum time of 120 s. After increasing the suction to 20, 30, 40, and 50%, we recorded the pressure drop time to 0 after 22, 14, 11, and 8 s. Using the MIP-L, pressure stabilized at 44 cm H2O and decreased to 8 cm H2O after inserting the 3.4 mm probe. With 10% suction, a pressure stabilization was measured at 2 cm H2O and remained stable for 120 s. At suction levels of 20 and 30%, the pressure drop time to 0 was 6 and 5 s.
With a 10% suction, removing stones was efficient, and the kidney’s filling volume was maintained.
Conclusions
When using the LithoClast® Trilogy, a suction setting of 10% seems to be optimal for the treatment of urinary calculi when applying suction continuously.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Axelsson TA et al (2020) Consultation on kidney stones, Copenhagen 2019: lithotripsy in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03383-w
Türk C et al (2020) EAU guidelines on urolithiasis. https://uroweb.org/guideline/urolithiasis/
Fernstrom I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy: a new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10(3):257–259
Wisard M et al (1991) First clinical evaluation of the CHUV ballistic lithoclast. Helv Chir Acta 58(3):319–321
Carlos EC et al (2018) In vitro comparison of a novel single probe dual-energy lithotripter to current devices. J Endourol 32(6):534–540
Bader MJ et al (2020) Comparison of stone elimination capacity and drilling speed of endoscopic clearance lithotripsy devices. World J Urol 39(2):563–569
Sabnis RB et al (2020) EMS Lithoclast Trilogy: an effective single-probe dual-energy lithotripter for mini and standard PCNL. World J Urol 38(4):1043–1050
Timm B et al (2020) Stone clearance times with mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of a 1.5 mm ballistic/ultrasonic mini-probe vs. laser. Can Urol Assoc J. 15(1):E17
Khoder W et al (2020) Comparative evaluation of tissue damage induced by ultrasound and impact dual-mode endoscopic lithotripsy versus conventional single-mode ultrasound lithotripsy. World J Urol 38(4):1051–1058
Nagele U et al (2015) Flow matters 2: how to improve irrigation flow in small-Calibre percutaneous procedures-the purging effect. World J Urol 33(10):1607–1611
Nagele U et al (2007) A newly designed Amplatz sheath decreases intrapelvic irrigation pressure during mini-percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy: an in-vitro pressure-measurement and microscopic study. J Endourol 21(9):1113–1116
Lowe G, Knudsen BE (2009) Ultrasonic, pneumatic and combination intracorporeal lithotripsy for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23(10):1663–1668
Krambeck AE et al (2011) Randomized controlled, multicentre clinical trial comparing a dual-probe ultrasonic lithotrite with a single-probe lithotrite for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. BJU Int 107(5):824–828
Marberger M (1983) Disintegration of renal and ureteral calculi with ultrasound. Urol Clin North Am 10(4):729–742
Loftus CJ et al (2018) Mini versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the impact of sheath size on intrarenal pelvic pressure and infectious complications in a porcine model. J Endourol 32(4):350–353
Saltzman B, Khasidy LR, Smith AD (1987) Measurement of renal pelvis pressures during endourologic procedures. Urology 30(5):472–474
Tokas T et al (2019) Pressure matters: intrarenal pressures during normal and pathological conditions, and impact of increased values to renal physiology. World J Urol 37(1):125–131
Wilhelm K et al (2019) Characterization of flow-caused intrarenal pressure conditions during percutaneous nephrolithotomy in vitro. J Endourol 33(3):235–241
Abourbih S et al (2017) Renal pelvic pressure in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the effect of multiple tracts. J Endourol 31(10):1079–1083
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Mr. Wolfgang Merkle for his scientific support for this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
FS: project development, data collection, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing, UN: project development, data collection, and data analysis, JSch: project development, data collection, and data analysis, MJB: project development, data collection, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing. All authors critically revised the manuscript and approved the final version. They agree to the accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None of the authors have conflict of interest concerning the data published in this article.
Informed consent
The research did not involve human participants.
Research involving human and animal participants.
This study did not involve human participants.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This is a paper from the training and research in urological surgical therapy (T.R.U.S.T.) group.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Strittmatter, F., Nagele, U., Schachtner, J. et al. Evaluation of intrarenal pressure stability at different lithotripter suction settings in a porcine kidney model. World J Urol 39, 3665–3670 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03679-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03679-5