• Dtsch. Med. Wochenschr. · Oct 1999

    Comparative Study

    [Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in cholecystolithiasis using a new type of minilithotripter].

    • T Wehrmann, T Schmitt, B Braden, H Seifert, E H Marlinghaus, and W F Caspary.
    • Medizinische Klinik II, Klinikum der Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt/Main. t.wehrmann@em.uni-frankfurt.de
    • Dtsch. Med. Wochenschr. 1999 Oct 8;124(40):1158-63.

    Background And ObjectiveExtracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) of gallstones has until now required fixed, nearly room-sized and expensive equipment. It has become even less cost-effective with an increase in the number of laparoscopic cholecystectomies. The authors have technically modified a mini-lithotripter, used for dissolving salivary stones, for application against gallstones (by changing the energy spectrum and depth of focus).Patients And Methods125 consecutive patients with solitary gallstone underwent lithotripsy according to a standard protocol (including oral litholysis), 64 of them (average age 42.5 +/- 9.3 years; 44 women, 20 men) by conventional ESWL (with the Modulith), 62 (average age 41.6 +/- 10.1 years; 43 women, 13 men) with a modified mini-lithotripter (Minilith). Clinical and sonographic follow-up took place at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Quality of life was documented according to a point score (GIQL), developed specially for patients with gastrointestinal conditions.ResultsThe mini-lithotripter applied significantly lower voltage and more shock-wave impulses per treatment than the conventional ESWL (p < 0.01), while patient tolerance, measured with a visual analogue scale, was the same. Application of the mini-lithotripter was easier and quicker than with conventional ESWL, namely 31 +/- 8 min vs 41 +/- 12 min (p < 0.01). Frequency of adequate stone fragmentation per patient was the same for both methods, 2.2 +/- 0.5 applications with the mini-lithotripter vs 1.6 +/- 0.3 with conventional ESWL (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the methods with regard to improved quality of life (increase of GIQL scale of 16% with the conventional ESWL, 14% with the mini-lithotripter) or freedom from stone at 1 year after lithotripsy (conventional ESWL: 80%, mini-lithotripter: 82%). Colics recurred in 15 of 64 patients receiving conventional ESWL, and in 13 of 61 in the mini-lithotripter group (difference not significant). There were no other complications.ConclusionThe cheaper mini-lithotripter, costing only a third of the conventional ESWL, is equally effective in the dissolution of gallstones.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.