Shock Wave-Induced Pancreatic Trauma

A case is described of the appearance of a pancreatic or peripancreatic lesion after left renal calculus fragmentation by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Its anatomical location and subsequent disappearance suggest it was related to trauma caused by the shock waves. The brief literature on pancreatic injury after ESWL is reviewed, and the role of the patient's underlying liver disease in the genesis of this complication is discussed.     

Outcomes after clearance of pancreatic stones with or without pancreatic stenting

Background Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and endoscopic lithotripsy are useful for the fragmentation and extraction of pancreatic stones. However, pancreatic stones often recur, for which an adequate strategy is needed. Treatment for stricture of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) with a pancreatic stent after clearance of pancreatic stones may reduce the recurrence of pancreatic symptoms and stones. Methods Forty patients with chronic pancreatitis with MPD stones were treated with ESWL in combination with endoscopic stone extraction. After clearance of the stones, a pancreatic stent was inserted when a stricture of MPD was observed on pancreatography. The stent was exchanged every 3 months and removed after a total of 1 year. We examined episodes of recurrent pain and pancreatitis in patients with and without stenting, as well as the MPD diameter, during follow-up. Results MPD stricture was seen in 27 patients, and a stent was successfully inserted in 24 of them. Pancreatic symptoms recurred in five patients (21%) in the stenting group and in three patients (23%) in the control group during a mean follow-up period of 1.5 and 1.2 years, respectively. The diameter of the MPD, before, just after, and 1 year after treatment, was 7.6, 5.4, and 5.8 mm, respectively. It was significantly decreased after 1 year of follow-up, as well as just after stent removal, compared with before treatment (P < 0.05). Conclusions Additional stenting for MPD after extraction of pancreatic stones may reduce the risk of recurrence of pancreatic symptoms.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of pancreatic stones.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of pancreatic stones was performed in eight patients with chronic pancreatitis and a dilated duct system harbouring stones 5 to 20 mm (means 10 (SD) 5 mm) in diameter. After endoscopic sphincterotomy of the pancreatic orifice the stones were disintegrated by shock waves under fluoroscopic control using a kidney lithotripter (Dornier HM3). The procedure was well tolerated by all but one patient, who had a mild pancreatitic attack immediately after lithotripsy. Clearance of the pancreatic duct systems from the larger stones was achieved in seven of eight patients. Half of the patients showed no improvement in the intensity and frequency of pain. The other patients had a marked amelioration of symptoms, however, both immediately and during a mean follow up interval of 11 (eight) months. A selective combined approach by endoscopy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of pancreatic stones seems promising.     

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Pancreatic Duct Stones

Chronic calcifying pancreatitis presents a major clinical problem, often requiring extensive surgery. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) offers a new therapeutic option. We applied ESWL after endoscopic sphincterotomy of the pancreatic orifice in eight patients with impacted pancreatic duct stones. An electromagnetic lithotriptor (Siemens Lithostar, Erlangen, FRG) was used. Patients were treated in prone position under fluoroscopic control. A mean of 6,813 shock waves (range 1,500-10,000) was delivered in one or two sessions. Disintegration of stones was achieved in 6/8 patients, initial relief of pain in 7/8 patients, and total clearance of the pancreatic duct in 3/8 patients. One patient had an exacerbation of her pancreatitis one day after ESWL, which resolved rapidly with medical treatment. No other complications were observed. Four of five patients with fragmented stones had no abdominal complaints at follow-up (mean 17 months, range 3-27). Three patients in whom ESWL was not completely successful (two without and one with partial fragmentation) underwent an operation according to Puestow. Two of them still have abdominal complaints after surgery. From these data, we conclude that ESWL of pancreatic duct stones is a promising new alternative for surgery, when endoscopic stone extraction fails.     

A Case of Pancreatolithiasis Treated by a Combination of Endoscopic Extraction and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

We report on the case of a 50-year-old woman with idiopathic chronic calcifying pancreatitis and diabetes. An endoscopic retrograde pancreatography showed a stone with a diameter of 23 mm and multiple small stones in the head of the pancreas. An endoscopic pancreatic sphincterotomy was performed. However, the stone could not be removed endoscopically. So we performed an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) using a Tripter X1. The stone was located in the shock wave focus by fluoroscopy. Under intravenous sedation, the patient received 5 ESWL sessions (a total of 11700 shock waves with an energy of 18kv). ESWL permitted stone disintegration and successful endoscopic extraction of the fragments. Complete clearance in the main pancreatic duct was achieved. No severe complications were observed. After treatment, an improvement in the PFD test was seen. ESWL is an effective method for treatment of endoscopically unextractable pancreatic ductal stones.     

Per-oral pancreatoscopy-guided lithotripsy vs. extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treating refractory main pancreatic duct stones in chronic pancreatitis: Protocol for an open-label multi-center randomized clinical trial

Backgrounds/ObjectivesPatients with chronic pancreatitis may develop pancreatic duct stones that can obstruct outflow leading to ductal hypertension and pain. Both endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP) with per-oral pancreatoscopy (POP) and intraductal lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) are feasible options to attempt ductal stone clearance. This study aims to compare POP-guided lithotripsy with ESWL in the management of refractory symptomatic main pancreatic duct stones.MethodsThis is an open-label, multi-center, parallel, randomized clinical trial. Patients with chronic pancreatitis and main pancreatic duct stones ≥5 mm who fail standard ERP methods for stone removal will be eligible for this study. In total, 150 subjects will be randomized 1:1 to either ESWL or POP. A maximum of 4 sessions of either ESWL or POP will be allowed in each arm, with crossover permitted thereafter. The primary outcome is complete stone clearance and secondary outcomes include quality of life, pain scores, number of interventions, and daily opiate requirements.ConclusionsThis study aims to answer the question of which lithotripsy method is superior in removing refractory pancreatic duct stones while addressing the effects of lithotripsy on quality of life and pain in patients with chronic calcific pancreatitis (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04115826).     

Surgical management

Surgical management of renal calculi depends on stone size and location. Spontaneous passage can be expected for calculi less than 5 mm in diameter, however larger stones are unlikely to pass. Proximal ureteral stones less than 10 mm are preferably treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), whereas larger stones can be treated with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) alone or in addition to ESWL. For distal ureteral stones, patients can choose between ESWL and ureterolithotripsy. Stones located in the renal pelvis unlikely to pass on their own are treated with ESWL if less than 2 cm or PCNL alone or in combination with ESWL. Open stone surgery is rarely performed today and is, reserved for cases where minimally invasive management is contraindicated or has previously failed.     

Utility of Doppler ultrasonography for diagnosing and assessing treatment effects in liver compartment syndrome

Liver compartment syndrome is a life-threatening complication of hepatic subcapsular hematoma; diagnosis and assessment of treatment effects are therefore important. We report a rare case of liver compartment syndrome due to spontaneous hepatic subcapsular hematoma without any underlying conditions, in which Doppler ultrasonography (US) proved useful in both diagnosis and assessment of treatment effects. A 32-year-old woman experienced sudden epigastralgia and was diagnosed with hepatic subcapsular hematoma in the right lobe, based on contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Hepatic arteriography showed active hemorrhage and Doppler US showed retrograde flow in the right portal vein. From these findings, we diagnosed hepatic subcapsular hematoma complicated with liver compartment syndrome, and performed embolization of the bleeding point and percutaneous hematoma drainage. After these medical procedures, normalized antegrade flow in the right portal vein was observed on Doppler US. No underlying conditions contributing to hematoma were identified. In this case, Doppler US was useful for both diagnosis and assessment of treatment effects in liver compartment syndrome. When we examine patients with hepatic subcapsular hematoma, Doppler US should be used to diagnose the presence of liver compartment syndrome and assess treatment effects.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of pancreatic duct stones and patient factors related to stone disintegration

Background: Background: Stones in the main pancreatic duct (MPD) are difficult to remove by endoscopic devices alone in some patients who have chronic pancreatitis. We treated these patients with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and analyzed the patient factors related to disintegration. Methods: Twenty-four patients were treated with ESWL alone or with combined endoscopic-ESWL to disintegrate or remove MPD stones. Results: Ten patients were treated by ESWL alone and 14 by combined endoscopic-ESWL. A total of 19 patients (79%) were effectively treated by either method. The mean MPD diameter decreased significantly after ESWL. In most of the patients who had chronic abdominal symptoms, these symptoms were relieved at discharge. Severe side effects of complications did not occur during ESWL therapy. Acute abdominal symptoms and a significant increase in the white blood cell count, total bilirubin, and aspartate aminotransferase were observed only immediately after ESWL. Although there were no significant differences, we observed that the patients with a higher stone disintegration success rate showed the following factors: (1) female, (2) non-alcoholic pancreatitis, (3) younger age, (4) shorter duration of symptoms, (5) smaller stones, and (6) a lower Hounsfield unit value of stones. Although about half of the patients had recurring abdominal symptoms and stones during a follow-up period of 12 months, the stones which caused relapse in short-term intervals were disintegrated easily by ESWL. Conclusions: We may consider the application of ESWL therapies for patients who show the factors associated with easily disintegratable stone conditions. These therapies are highly effective and relatively safe procedures for pancreatic duct stones in such patients. Received: February 2, 2001 / Accepted: October 5, 2001     

Disintegration of pancreatic duct stones with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Treatment of pancreatic duct stones by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) serves as a nonsurgical treatment modality in patients with stones that are located in upstream of the strictures or in patients with impacted stones. We present the results of ESWL in endoscopically unretrievable pancreatic duct stones in the past 2 years. METHODS: Between January 2002 and December 2003, 58 patients with chronic pancreatitis were treated by ESWL for pancreatic duct stones. ESWL was performed with an electrohydraulic lithotripter ultrasound focusing system. RESULTS: The mean number of shockwave treatments was 2.5, and the patients received 4,578 (1,527-10,155) shockwave discharges with a mean energy of 15.8 kV. Fragmentations of the stones were achieved in 54 patients (93.2%), and complete clearance of the stones were noticed in 27 patients (46.6%). Fragmentation of stones equal or less than 3 mm in diameter was associated with successful removal of stones (p<0.05). Complete relief of pain occurred in 32 patients (55.2%). The procedures were well tolerated and no patient had significant complications such as acute pancreatitis. CONCLUSIONS: ESWL is an effective and a safe procedure for endoscopically unretrievable main pancreatic duct stones. ESWL combined with endoscopic therapy can increase the success rate of nonsurgical removal of pancreatic duct stones in patients with chronic pancreatitis.     

Common bile duct and pancreatic injury after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal stone

Common bile duct and pancreatic injury are rare complications following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. We reported a case of peripancreatic abscess with inflammation change of common bile duct and pancreatic head following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for right renal stone. Its anatomical location and subsequent clinical course suggest it was related to trauma caused by the shock wave. It should be considered a relative contraindication to apply extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in cases of right renal stone associated with large gall stones.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of pancreatic duct stones

The purpose of endoscopic therapy in chronic pancreatitis is to decompress the main pancreatic duct and to remove the obstacles that impede the ductal flow of pancreatic juice. The availability of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has improved the results of endoscopic drainage of the main pancreatic duct and has also expanded the indications of endoscopic therapy for chronic pancreatitis. This article briefly reviews ESWL for pancreatic duct stones in patients with chronic pancreatitis, including our experience with ESWL. ESWL is an effective and safe procedure for endoscopically unremovable main pancreatic duct stones, and, in selected patients, ESWL alone may be effective.     

Histological changes of the gallbladder and liver after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for gallbladder.

The histological changes of the gallbladder and liver following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) were investigated in a canine model. After performing ESWL on human cholesterol stones placed in the gallbladder of 8 dogs, the gallbladder and livers were removed for pathological study. The mucosa of the gallbladder showed erosion and ulceration in three of the eight dogs. Edema and bleeding were found in the stroma of the gallbladder beds. Hemorrhagic necrosis and vacuolar degeneration occurred in liver parenchyma adjacent to the gallbladder bed, but the portal area was fairly well preserved. It can be said that ESWL caused damage to both the liver and the gallbladder, but its effects on the liver may be only slight because of the preservation of the portal area.     

Histological changes of the gallbladder and liver after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for gallbladder

The histological changes of the gallbladder and liver following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) were investigated in a canine model. After performing ESWL on human cholesterol stones placed in the gallbladder of 8 dogs, the gallbladder and livers were removed for pathological study. The mucosa of the gallbladder showed erosion and ulceration in three of the eight dogs. Edema and bleeding were found in the stroma of the gallbladder beds. Hemorrhagic necrosis and vacuolar degeneration occured in liver parenchyma adjacent to the gallbladder bed, but the portal area was fairly well preserved. It can be said that ESWL caused damage to both the liver and the gallbladder, but its effects on the liver may be only slight because of the preservation of the portal area.     

Endoscopic treatment of pancreatic duct stones using a 10F pancreatoscope and electrohydraulic lithotripsy

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic therapy with adjunctive extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy fails to provide clearance of pancreatic duct stones in up to 25% of symptomatic patients. Direct contact lithotripsy may provide an additional option for removal of refractory stones. We report our initial experience using a prototype 10F "baby" endoscope to administer electrohydraulic lithotripsy. METHODS: Five patients failing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and one patient with recurrent pancreatic duct stones after surgery were selected to undergo endoscopic electrohydraulic lithotripsy. After pancreatic sphincterotomy and balloon dilation (8 or 10 mm), the 10F endoscope was introduced and electrohydraulic lithotripsy was used to fragment stones under direct visualization. RESULTS: Six patients underwent 9 intraductal electrohydraulic lithotripsy procedures. Complete or partial pancreatic duct clearance was accomplished in all but one. No complications from the lithotripsy procedure were noted. The 5 patients with partial or complete duct clearance experienced complete relief of abdominal pain of at least 6 months' duration following their final procedure. CONCLUSION: Electrohydraulic lithotripsy within the pancreatic duct provides an adjunctive endoscopic option for treatment of patients with symptomatic pancreatic duct stones. Our initial experience suggests that electrohydraulic lithotripsy therapy can successfully fragment stones refractory to conventional endoscopic stone extraction methods or extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Further experience is necessary to establish the risks of electrohydraulic lithotripsy within the pancreatic duct.     

Electromagnetically generated extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and adjuvant combined oral litholysis for therapy of symptomatic gallbladder stones.

A prospective study was conducted to evaluate effectivity, problems and adverse effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) using a newly developed electromagnetic biliary lithotriptor (Lithostar Plus, Siemens, Erlangen, FRG) for the treatment of selected patients presenting with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. In addition to generally accepted criteria for the selection of patients, gallbladder contractility was established and pigment stones were excluded by computed tomography (CT). 80 out of 486 patients (63 females, 17 males, mean age 36, range 17-76 years) were selected for ESWL using a standardized diagnostic program. 62 out of 80 patients participating in the study had solitary concrements (diameter 23.3 +/- 6.4 mm) while in 18 patients 2 or 3 stones (diameter below 10 mm) were observed. Stone fragmentation was achieved after an average of 1.35 treatment sessions (range 1-3) in 78 (97.5%) patients. No clinically relevant adverse effects were observed. Immediately after ESWL, ultrasound revealed misleading results with regard to stone fragmentation. 98.7% of patients (n = 77) were seen for follow-up investigations 3, 6 and 9 months after ESWL, and 82% at 12 months. A total of 40 (53%) patients became free of stones. Subgroup analysis showed that 68% of the patients were free of stones (stone diameter 10-20 mm), 54% (20-30 mm) and 33% (multiple stones), respectively. We therefore conclude that ESWL should be restricted to highly selected patients presenting with small (10-20 mm) solitary concrements.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in gallbladder stones: report of 200 cases]

The effect and experience in treating 200 patients having gallbladder stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) were reported. Traditional Chinese medicine was used in combination in these patients. The overall effective lithotriptic rate was 91%. In a follow-up study of 137 of the cases, the rate of complete disappearance of gallbladder stones was 16.8%, 25.5% and 39.4%, respectively 1, 3, and 6 months after lithotripsy. During treatment, the patients had no remarkable discomfort. The authors consider that the lithotriptic effect is related to the nature, size, morphology and structure of the stones and ESWL is promising non-operative treatment. However, improved instrumentation is necessary for better efficacy of lithotripsy.     

Endoscopic treatment of an impacted pancreatic duct stone using a balloon catheter for electrohydraulic lithotripsy without pancreatoscopy

Obstructing main pancreatic duct (PD) stones represent a challenge for endoscopic removal because they are frequently impacted within the duct, are hard, and process sharp edges. Multiple series have been published demonstrating that removal of obstructing stones in the main PD can improve symptoms in the majority of patients with chronic pancreatitis. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has become an accepted technique to facilitate stone clearance when standard endoscopic methods fail. More recently, direct contact lithotripsy with the use of smaller caliber endoscopes has been described as an alternative to ESWL. Limited experience suggests that intraductal electrohydraulic lithotripsy under direct endoscopic visualization with a small caliber pancreatoscope results in successful fragmentation of PD stones that have been refractory to standard endoscopic methods or ESWL. Herein, we report the use of intraductal electrohydraulic lithotripsy to fragment a large obstructing PD stone guided only by fluoroscopy without the utilization of a pancreatoscope.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of gallstones: 20th anniversary of the first treatment

Twenty years ago, in January 1985, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was first applied successfully in a patient with gallbladder stones. In the following years, the conditions which influence the success rate of ESWL have been extensively investigated. It was shown that the characteristics of the stones, gallbladder emptying and the degree of stone fragmentation are the most important factors which determine the clearance of all fragments from the gallbladder after ESWL. Severe side effects, such as biliary pancreatitis and liver haematoma, were found to be rare and no deaths related to the procedure have been reported. One or more episodes of biliary pain were observed in about one third of patients within the first 3-4 months after ESWL. Follow-up studies after successful treatment, however, have shown that stone recurrence is considerable, limiting the use of ESWL as a non-invasive therapeutic option. Stone recurrence varies between different subgroups of patients indicating that gallbladder motor function and other less well defined factors may be of importance. The recurrence of stones after ESWL is one of the reasons why laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the standard treatment of symptomatic gallbladder stones today. ESWL has kept its role only in the treatment of bile duct stones resistant to endoscopic extraction. Unless stone recurrence can be decreased by better patient selection and/or other measures to prevent gallstone recurrence, ESWL of gallbladder stones has little chance of surviving.     

Pulverisation of calcified and non-calcified gall bladder stones: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy used alone.

Using a modified electromagnetic lithotripter (Siemens), extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) was performed in 260 patients with gall bladder stones. Exclusion criteria for treatment were a non-functioning gall bladder, subcostal gall bladder location, and multiple stones occupying more than three quarters of the gall bladder volume. Stone pulverisation was the end point of ESWL. The number of shock wave discharges and sessions was not limited. Pulverisation was achieved in 250 patients (96.1%) after a median of three ESWL sessions (range 1-21). The number of sessions required depended upon stone composition and burden. More than three sessions were required in 60.2% of patients with calcified stones compared with 35.9% of patients with non-calcified stones (p < 0.001). 65.8% of patients with stones measuring more than 30 mm in total diameter required more than three sessions compared with 42.9% of patients with a stone burden less than 30 mm (p < 0.01). At 18-24 (8-12) months follow up, stone clearance was achieved in 94.3% (80.4%) of patients with non-calcified stones, compared with 89.5% (76.8%) in patients with calcified stones and in 75% (71.4%) of patients with a total stone diameter more than 30 mm compared with 95.7% (80.4%) for patients with a total stone diameter less than 30 mm (p < 0.05). ESWL related complications (gross haematuria) occurred in three patients. Thirty six (13.8%) patients experienced biliary colic; four had cholecystectomy, and five endoscopic papillotomy because of common bile duct obstruction. Stone recurrence was seen in 5.3% of patients over a follow up period of up to two years (median 16.6 months).