Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 8, 2026
07:50
An In vitro System to Gauge the Thrombolytic Efficacy of Histotripsy and a Lytic Drug
Published on: June 4, 2021
The effectiveness of shock wave lithotripters: a case matched comparison
Shaheen Alanee1, Roland Ugarte, Manoj Monga
1Urologic Surgery Department, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA.
The Journal of Urology
|October 19, 2010
Summary
Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) using Medstone STS and Modulith SLX machines showed equivalent stone-free rates for most kidney stones. The Medstone STS demonstrated superior success for distal ureteral stones.
Area of Science:
- Urology
- Medical Devices
- Nephrolithiasis Treatment
Background:
- Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is a common procedure for kidney stone removal.
- Comparing different SWL technologies is crucial for optimizing treatment outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the effectiveness of an electromagnetic lithotripter (Medstone STS) with an electrohydraulic lithotripter (Modulith SLX).
- To evaluate treatment success based on stone-free status using identical criteria.
Main Methods:
- A case-matched comparison of 8,565 patients treated between 2003 and 2007.
- Matching criteria included stone size, location, and patient body mass index.
- Outcomes assessed were treatment success (stone-free status) and need for secondary procedures.
Main Results:
- Overall stone-free rates were similar between Modulith SLX (61.1%) and Medstone STS (64.5%).
- No significant differences were found for all stones, lower pole kidney stones, or ureteral stones.
- Medstone STS showed a higher stone-free rate for distal ureteral stones (83.63% vs. 66.67%).
Conclusions:
- Both Medstone STS and Modulith SLX are equally effective for SWL across various stone sizes and most locations.
- Medstone STS offers improved success rates for distal ureteral stones.
- This study provides a direct comparison of two widely used lithotripters.
