Bierkens A F, Hendrikx A J, de Kort V J, de Reyke T, Bruynen C A, Bouve E R, Beek T V, Vos P, Berkel H V
Radboud Academic Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
J Urol. 1992 Sep;148(3 Pt 2):1052-6; discussion 1056-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36814-3.
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has become the treatment of choice for urinary calculi. The good results of the first generation Dornier HM3 lithotriptor stimulated the development of second generation machines. A multicenter trial is presented involving the Siemens Lithostar, Dornier HM4, Wolf Piezolith 2300, Direx Tripter X-1 and Breakstone lithotriptor to compare the therapeutic efficacy of second generation machines. Treatment results were best for calculi less than 2 cm. in diameter. Although the second generation lithotriptors are comparable to each other, none of the machines provided a success rate comparable to that of the first generation unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotriptor. The 5 machines differed mainly in types of stones treated in relation to imaging system, use of anesthesia, use of auxiliary procedures and hospitalization but overall success rates were similar. We conclude that second generation ESWL is less effective than first generation ESWL.
体外冲击波碎石术（ESWL）已成为治疗尿路结石的首选方法。第一代多尼尔HM3碎石机取得的良好效果推动了第二代机器的发展。本文介绍了一项多中心试验，涉及西门子Lithostar、多尼尔HM4、狼牌Piezolith 2300、Direx Tripter X-1和Breakstone碎石机，以比较第二代机器的治疗效果。对于直径小于2厘米的结石，治疗效果最佳。虽然第二代碎石机之间具有可比性，但没有一台机器的成功率能与第一代未经改良的多尼尔HM3碎石机相媲美。这5台机器在与成像系统、麻醉使用、辅助程序使用和住院情况相关的所治疗结石类型方面存在主要差异，但总体成功率相似。我们得出结论，第二代ESWL的效果不如第一代ESWL。
