Prostate Cancer Foundation 2018 Scientific Retreat

Prostate Cancer Foundation 2018 Scientific Retreat

INTERVIEW WITH ANDREA MIYAHIRA
The Prostate Cancer Foundation: A Discussion with Andrea Miyahira

VIEW ALL PCF VIDEOS

Prostate Cancer Foundation 2018 Scientific Retreat

Prostate Cancer Foundation 2018 Scientific Retreat

INTERVIEW WITH KENNETH PIENTA
The Process of Metastasis in Prostate Cancer

VIEW ALL PCF VIDEOS

European Society for Medical Oncology 2018 Congress

European Society for Medical Oncology 2018 Congress

INTERVIEW WITH FRED SAAD
A Renewed Analysis of ERA 223

VIEW ALL ESMO VIDEOS

Videos
State-of-the-industry video lectures by leading urology experts
Latest Videos
Featured Videos

TAIPEI, TAIWAN (UroToday.com) - Introduction and Objectives: Several ultrasonic, pneumatic or electro-mechanical lithotrites are used during PCNL for fragmentation and removal of renal calculi. In an in vitro setup we compared different lithotrites or combinations (CyberWand/Olympus, Lithoclast Master/EMS, LUS2/Olympus, Lithobreaker/EMS) regarding their efficacy of lithotripsy and stone removal.

wceMethods: Bego stone phantoms (14 · 14 mm) were placed in a plastic funnel. The funnel was fixed in a 0,9% NaCl-filled basin. Now lithotripsy (n = 5) was performed through a 26 CH nephroscope (Storz) with different lithotrites. Time of lithotripsy until total stone removal was determined. Balanced irrigation/ suction flow (400 ml/min) was guaranteed. Using Lithoclast Master, after initial pneumatical lithotripsy pneumatic probe was disconnected and fragments removed only with ultrasonic probe (Vario). In another setup 2:30 min disintegration was performed with Lithobreaker, following stone removal was performed with LUS2. Additionally Lithotripsy was performed with LUS 2 only and CyberWand. Mean and standard deviations were computed and statistical analysis was performed.

Results: Mean time until total removal of fragments was 217 sec for Lithoclast, 335 sec for CyberWand and 390 sec for LUS2. The initial disintegration with LithoBreaker did not advantage the results of the LUS2. The outer probe of CyberWand did brake often, probes of Lithoclast and LUS2 did not show any wear.

Conclusions: In this in vitro setup Lithoclast and Cyber-Wand performed the fastest stone removal. Disadvantage of Cyberwand is the low probe durability. Additional disintegration with LithoBreaker does not advantage the efficacy of LUS2.

Source of Funding: EMS - Electro Medical Systems.

 
Listen to an interview with one of the authors of this study.

 

Presented by Keil Christian, Hegele Axel, Hofmann Rainer, and Olbert Peter at the 32nd World Congress of Endourology & SWL - September 3 - 7, 2014 - Taipei, Taiwan

Dept. of Urology and Pediatric Urology, University Medical Center, Germany 

 

Clinical Trials
Searchable data base of currently enrolling clinical trials
Journals
Publications focusing on urological cancer treatments through original commentary & articles
Everyday Urology Volume 3 Issue 3

Everyday Urology™ - Oncology Insights

PCAN cover

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases

From the Editor

@UroToday
E-Newsletters

Newsletter subscription

Free Daily and Weekly newsletters offered by content of interest

The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are rapidly advancing. Sign up today for articles, videos, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.

Subscribe

Calendar
Upcoming educational events
December 13-16, 2018 / ESMO Immuno-Oncology Congress 2018
ESMO Immuno-Oncology Congress 2018
January 17-19, 2019 /
SNMMI 2019 Mid-Winter Meeting