• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用多尼尔HM3、EDAP LT 01和索诺利特2000设备进行体外冲击波碎石术的比较研究。

Comparative studies of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy by Dornier HM3, EDAP LT 01 and Sonolith 2000 devices.

作者信息

Tan E C, Tung K H, Foo K T

机构信息

Department of Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.

出版信息

J Urol. 1991 Aug;146(2):294-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37774-1.

DOI:10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37774-1
PMID:1856919
Abstract

During a 2-year period extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was done at our institution in 70 patients with the Dornier HM3, 113 with the EDAP LT 01 and 104 with the Sonolith 2000 lithotriptors. The size and location of stones were comparable in all 3 series, and all treatments were done by the same team of urologists. Complete fragmentation occurred in 79% of the patients treated by the Dornier, 82% treated by the EDAP and 79% treated by the Sonolith devices, with 3-month stone-free rates of 66, 67 and 58%, respectively. Auxiliary procedures were needed in 12% of the patients in the Dornier, 13% in the EDAP and 9% in the Sonolith groups. Repeat treatment was necessary in 4% of the Dornier group, 42% of the EDAP group and 26% of the Sonolith group. Therefore, all 3 lithotriptors are effective in stone disintegration and produce satisfactory results when selection criteria for ESWL are observed. The most significant difference among the 3 lithotriptors is the number of repeat treatments, which reflects the power and energy output of the lithotriptors. In conclusion, the Dornier HM3 device has the advantage of low repeat treatment rate and easier stone localization. The EDAP LT 01 unit has the advantage of lower treatment costs and anesthesia-free treatment with no irradiation. The Sonolith 2000 device has features of the other 2 lithotriptors with a superior ultrasound image.

摘要

在两年期间,我们机构使用多尼尔HM3碎石机为70例患者进行了体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL),使用EDAP LT 01碎石机为113例患者进行了治疗,使用Sonolith 2000碎石机为104例患者进行了治疗。所有3组患者的结石大小和位置相当,且所有治疗均由同一组泌尿外科医生完成。使用多尼尔碎石机治疗的患者中79%实现了结石完全破碎,使用EDAP碎石机治疗的为82%,使用Sonolith设备治疗的为79%,3个月无石率分别为66%、67%和58%。多尼尔组12%的患者、EDAP组13%的患者以及Sonolith组9%的患者需要辅助治疗。多尼尔组4%的患者、EDAP组42%的患者以及Sonolith组26%的患者需要重复治疗。因此,当遵循ESWL的选择标准时,所有3种碎石机在结石碎裂方面均有效且产生令人满意的结果。3种碎石机之间最显著的差异在于重复治疗的次数,这反映了碎石机的功率和能量输出。总之,多尼尔HM3设备具有重复治疗率低和结石定位更容易的优势。EDAP LT 01设备具有治疗成本较低以及无需麻醉和无辐射治疗的优势。Sonolith 2000设备兼具其他两种碎石机的特点且超声图像更佳。

相似文献

1
Comparative studies of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy by Dornier HM3, EDAP LT 01 and Sonolith 2000 devices.使用多尼尔HM3、EDAP LT 01和索诺利特2000设备进行体外冲击波碎石术的比较研究。
J Urol. 1991 Aug;146(2):294-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37774-1.
2
Comparison of first generation (Dornier HM3) and second generation (Medstone STS) lithotriptors: treatment results with 13,864 renal and ureteral calculi.第一代(多尼尔HM3)和第二代(美多斯STS)碎石机的比较:13864例肾和输尿管结石的治疗结果
J Urol. 1995 Mar;153(3 Pt 1):588-92. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199503000-00006.
3
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.第二代碎石机的疗效:一项对西门子Lithostar、多尼尔HM4、狼牌Piezolith 2300、Direx Tripter X-1和百胜碎石机进行的2206例体外冲击波碎石治疗的多中心比较研究。
J Urol. 1992 Sep;148(3 Pt 2):1052-6; discussion 1056-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36814-3.
4
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi.
J Urol. 1992 Jun;147(6):1495-8. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37606-1.
5
[Treatment of ureteral calculi with extracorporeal lithotripsy. Comparison between the original Dornier HM3 and the modified lithotriptor].
Arch Ital Urol Nefrol Androl. 1991 Mar;63(1):71-5.
6
Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy or extracorporeal piezoelectric lithotripsy? Comparison of costs and results.
Br J Urol. 1991 Jul;68(1):15-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1991.tb15248.x.
7
[Second generation shock wave lithotripsy: experience with the Siemens Lithostar].第二代冲击波碎石术:西门子Lithostar的应用经验
Hinyokika Kiyo. 1989 Dec;35(12):2099-105.
8
Optimal therapy for the distal ureteral stone: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy.远端输尿管结石的最佳治疗方法:体外冲击波碎石术与输尿管镜检查术的比较
J Urol. 1994 Jul;152(1):62-5. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)32816-1.
9
[Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy as surgical therapy in the kidney-ureter calculosis].[体外冲击波碎石术作为肾输尿管结石病的外科治疗方法]
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2003 Sep;75(3):150-7.
10
A prospective randomized trial comparing 2 lithotriptors for stone disintegration and induced renal trauma.一项比较两种碎石机用于结石破碎及所致肾损伤的前瞻性随机试验。
J Urol. 2003 Jan;169(1):54-7. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64033-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Revealing physical interactions of ultrasound waves with the body through photoelasticity imaging.通过光弹性成像揭示超声波与人体的物理相互作用。
Opt Lasers Eng. 2024 Oct;181. doi: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2024.108361. Epub 2024 Jun 14.
2
Evaluation of the LithoGold LG-380 lithotripter: in vitro acoustic characterization and assessment of renal injury in the pig model.LithoGold LG-380 碎石机的评估:体外声学特性及猪模型肾损伤评估。
J Endourol. 2013 May;27(5):631-9. doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0611. Epub 2013 Feb 6.
3
Evaluation of shock wave lithotripsy injury in the pig using a narrow focal zone lithotriptor.
采用窄焦区碎石器评估猪的冲击波碎石损伤。
BJU Int. 2012 Nov;110(9):1376-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11160.x. Epub 2012 Apr 23.
4
Reduction of bubble cavitation by modifying the diffraction wave from a lithotripter aperture.通过改变碎石器孔径的绕射波来减少气泡空化。
J Endourol. 2012 Aug;26(8):1075-84. doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0671. Epub 2012 Mar 26.
5
Shock wave lithotripsy: advances in technology and technique.冲击波碎石术:技术和技术的进步。
Nat Rev Urol. 2009 Dec;6(12):660-70. doi: 10.1038/nrurol.2009.216.