The advantages and disadvantages of piezoelectric lithotripsy are discussed with specific analysis of the EDAP LT01. A description of the EDAP LT01 is included, as well as its imaging properties and the physics of piezoelectric transduction. Installation, accommodation, and maintenance features are discussed. A total of 118 patients had 158 treatments for 134 renal and 24 ureteric calculi. Failure of imaging or fragmentation occurred in 3.9% of renal calculi and 33.3% of ureteric calculi. Six staghorn calculi were treated with a mean clearance at three months of 83.6%. The majority (68.8%) of ureteric calculi had successful treatments with the stone pushed into the kidney before treatment with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL).
KeywordsShock Wave Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy Full Width Half Maximum Renal Calculus Piezoelectric Element
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Rassweiler J, Hath U, Bub P, et al: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for distal ureteral calculi. Endourology
1: 15, 1986.Google Scholar
Woodcock JP: Ultrasonics
. United Kingdom: A. Hilger, 1979.Google Scholar
Coleman AJ, Saunders JE, Crum LA, et al: Acoustic cavitation generated by an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter. Ultrasound in Med and Biol
13: 69, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1988