Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tissue effects of intracorporeal lithotripsy techniques during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripters on rat bladder

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to determine the tissue effects of ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripsy on the rat urothelium. The rats were divided into three groups. Groups I and II consisted of ten rats each that underwent intracorporeal lithotripsy (pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripsy, respectively). Group III contained ten control rats and no lithotripsy method was used, they served as references for absence of injury. The light microscopy findings were evaluated as follows: squamous metaplasia, papillary projection, inflammation, increased stratification, and stone formation. In five (71.4%) animals of group II, bladders were edematous and hemorrhagic, macroscopically. Histologically, the bladder wall was normal in four rats of group I and in one of group II. There was a significant increase in inflammation (31.5%), squamous metaplasia (85.7%), papillary projection (71.4%), increased stratification (71.4%), and microscopic or macroscopic stone formation (85.7%) in the bladder wall of group II rats in comparison with group I and control group. In the rat model, we noted that ultrasonic devices have a potential risk for tissue injury. In turn, this was associated with a markedly increased deposition of CaOx stones in the kidney. When confronted with harder stones, pneumatic lithotripsy can be more effective while also minimizing tissue injury.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fernström I, Johannson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10:257–259

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lowe G, Knudsen BE (2009) Ultrasonic, pneumatic and combination intracorporeal lithotripsy for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 23:1663–1668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Liatsikos E, Dinlenc C, Fogarty J et al (2001) Efficiency and efficacy of different intracorporeal ultrasonic lithotripsy units on a synthetic stone model. J Endourol 15:925–928

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Resorlu B, Kara C, Oguz U et al (2011) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for complex caliceal and staghorn stones in patients with solitary kidney. Urol Res 39:171–176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE et al (2005) Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn calculi: diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol 173:1991–2000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Preminger GM, Clayman RV, Hardeman SW et al (1985) Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy vs open surgery for renal calculi: a comparative study. JAMA 254:1054–1058

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Unsal A, Resorlu B, Kara C et al (2010) Safety and efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in infants, preschool age and older children with different sizes of instruments. Urology 76:247–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sofer M, Watterson JD, Wollin TA et al (2002) Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi in 598 patients. J Urol 167:31–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Teh CL, Zhong P, Preminger GM (1998) Laboratory and clinical assessment of pneumatically driven intracorporeal lithotripsy. J Endourol 12:163–169

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Teichman J, Vassar G, Bishoff J (1998) Holmium:YAG lithotripsy yields smaller fragments than lithoclast, pulsed dye laser, or electrohydraulic lithotripsy. J Urol 159:17–23

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lehman DS, Hruby GW, Phillips C et al (2008) Prospective randomized comparison of a combined ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotrite with a standard ultrasonic. J Endourol 22:285–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Begun FP (1994) Modes of intracorporeal lithotripsy: Ultrasound versus electrohydraulic lithotripsy versus laser lithotripsy. Semin Urol 12:39–50

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hoffman R, Olbert P, Weber J et al (2002) Clinical experience with a new ultrasonic and LithoClast combination for percutaneous litholapaxy. BJU Int 90:16–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Haupt G, Sabrodina N, Orlovski M et al (2001) Rapid communication endoscopic lithotripsy with a new device combining ultrasound and lithoclast. J Endourol 15:929–935

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Denstedt JD, Razvi HA, Rowe E et al (1995) Investigation of the tissue effect of a new device for intracorporeal lithotripsy the Swiss Lithoclast. J Urol 153:535–537

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Piergiovanni M, Desgrandchamps F, Cochand-Priollet B et al (1994) Ureteral and bladder lesions after ballistic, ultrasonic, electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 8:293–299

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Xue YQ, He DL, Chen XF et al (2009) Shock wave induced kidney injury promotes calcium oxalate deposition. J Urol 182:762–765

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rabinovich YI, Esayanur M, Daosukho S et al (2006) Adhesion force between calcium oxalate monohydrate crystal and kidney epithelial cells and possible relevance for kidney stone formation. J Coll I Sci 300:131–140

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tsujihata M (2008) Mechanism of calcium oxalate renal stone formation and renal tubular cell injury. Int J Urol 15:115–120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Fuchs GJ (1988) Ultrasonic lithotripsy in the ureter. Urol Clin North Am 15:347–359

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Marberger M (1983) Disintegration of renal and ureteral calculi with ultrasound. Urol Clin North Am 10:729–742

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Akif Diri & Cankon Germiyonoglu

  2. Department of Urology, Kecioren Training and Research Hospital, Kardesler koop, Ayvali mah, 182.cad, 175. Sok, No: 14/8, PK: 06010, Kecioren, Ankara, Turkey

    Berkan Resorlu & Ali Unsal

  3. Department of Pathology, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Muzeyyen Astarci

Authors
  1. Akif Diri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Berkan Resorlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Muzeyyen Astarci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ali Unsal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cankon Germiyonoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Berkan Resorlu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Diri, A., Resorlu, B., Astarci, M. et al. Tissue effects of intracorporeal lithotripsy techniques during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripters on rat bladder. Urol Res 40, 409–413 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0439-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-011-0439-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation