Evidence Hub

Clinical efficacy of a combination pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotrite

Pietrow PK, Auge BK, Zhong P, Preminger GM

The Journal of urology, 2003

20 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: A new combination pneumatic/ultrasonic intracorporeal lithotriptor has been developed for percutaneous applications. It combines the stone clearing efficiency of an ultrasonic device with the fragmentation strength of a pneumatic probe into a single handpiece. We present our early clinical experience with this device in a prospective, randomized comparison a combination pneumatic/ultrasound lithotrite and standard ultrasonic lithotripsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 20 consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy for symptomatic calculi were randomized to receive stone fragmentation and removal using a standard ultrasonic device or a new combination pneumatic/ultrasonic unit. Stone location and burden were assessed before the operative procedure. The stone clearance rate in mm.2 per minute was calculated for the 2 devices. Complications and stone-free rates were compared in the 2 groups.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences in stone location and composition in the 2 groups of patients. Average time required for complete stone clearance was considerably less for the combination device (21.1 versus 43.7 minutes, p = 0.036). The opposite was true for the average rate of stone clearance in mm.2 per minute, in that the standard ultrasonic device could clear 16.8 versus 39.5 mm.2 per minute for the combination unit (p = 0.028). Stone-free and complications rates were slightly superior for the combination device but it was likely attributable…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 20 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free