Efficacy of in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for upper ureteral calculi

In contrast to the majority of renal calculi, in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for upper ureteral stones is still controversial. Some centers recommend retrograde mobilization of the calculus into the renal pelvis prior to ESWL as a routine procedure (UC + ESWL). To evaluate the efficiency of in situ ESWL for upper ureteric stones, we initiated a prospective clinical trial. From July 1985 to January 1986, 122 patients presented with upper ureteral calculi, necessitating a total of 146 different procedures: 88 in situ ESWL; 31 UC + ESWL; 15 antegrade ureteroscopies (URS); 6 retrograde URS; 2 open surgery (ureterolithotomy, nephrectomy), and 4 patients were managed conservatively. Of all 99 patients treated at the lithotripter, 80 patients received in situ ESWL (no emergency case, no location problems): in 60 patients (75%) the stone could be disintegrated in one session; 8 patients (10%) required a second ESWL session due to partial fragmentation. Retrograde mobilization using a ureteral catheter or URS was necessary in 9 patients due to failure of in situ ESWL (11%) and, in only 3 patients, we had to remove the stone by antegrade URS (4%). In conclusion, 96% of all upper ureteric stones suitable for primary ESWL could be treated by a noninvasive (in situ ESWL) or minimally invasive (UC + ESWL) procedure. Therefore we recommend in situ ESWL for these calculi. Primary retrograde mobilization is only indicated in case of location problems (stone close to the spine, obesity, skeleton deformation) or emergency cases (colic, hydronephrosis). Antegrade URS should be performed if retrograde mobilization fails or in emergency cases (acute pyelonephritis, following percutaneous nephrostomy, after clinical stabilization). The rate of open surgery is below 2%.     

Utility of ureteral stent for stone street after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

We reviewed the records of the 530 patients with urinary stones (renal stones: 243; ureter stones 287) who received extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (MFL5000; Dornier), from January 1995 to July 2002, retrospectively and determined whether the ureteral stent affected the incidence rate of stone street (SS). We also assessed the effect of ureteral stent on the subsequent management for SS. Forty patients (7.5%) developed SS. Twenty patients were inserted a ureteral stent prior to ESWL (stent group), and 20 patients were performed ESWL without a ureteral stent (in situ group). In the stent group, the most common (80.0%) location for SS was in the upper third ureter, while in the in situ group, SS mostly developed in the distal third ureter (60.0%). The incidence of SS did not differ significantly between the two groups when the size of renal and ureter stones was below 30 and 20 mm, respectively. When the renal stones were larger than above 30 mm, the incidence of SS in the stent group was significantly higher than that in the in situ group. SS disappeared spontaneously with stone passage in 10 of the patients in in situ group, but in only 1 patient in the stent group. In the stent group, 15 patients were treated for SS by removal of ureteral stent regardless of stone diameter. We conclude that ESWL should be performed without a ureteral stent when the stone diameter is below 20 mm. When the ureteral stent is thought to interfere with the delivery of stone fragments, the decision to remove it should be made as soon as possible.     

Do upper ureteral stones need to be manipulated (push back) into the kidneys before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy?

The current practice for the management of upper ureteral stones is to push the stone back into the renal pelvis before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL*). The results in 903 patients with an upper third ureteral stone pushed back before ESWL were compared to those of 815 with an upper third ureteral stone treated by ESWL in situ with a ureteral stent bypassing the stone. The stone size in the in situ group was larger than in the push back group. More shocks at a higher kilovoltage were required to treat the in situ group. The retreatment rate and post-ESWL secondary procedure rate for the push back group with single stones were 4% and 1.5%, respectively, compared to 5% and 7.5%, respectively, for the in situ group. The stone-free rate with single stones at 3 months was 73% in the push back group and 79% in the in situ group. There appears to be little advantage in manipulating a ureteral stone into the kidney (push back) before treatment by ESWL.     

Emergency extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for obstructing ureteral stones

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate emergency treatment of obstructing ureteral stones by in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) during acute renal colic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1994 to February 2000, 200 patients (mean age: 42 years) were treated by ESWL (EDAP LT-02) for obstructing ureteral stones causing acute renal colic refractory to medical treatment or recurring within 24hours of such treatment. Stones were visualised by fluoroscopic imaging and/or ultrasound. Follow-up included radiological and/or ultrasound examinations and lasted three months. RESULTS: Mean stone size was 7mm (3-20mm). At three months, 164/200 (82%) patients were stone-free. This rate ranged from 79% to 83% according to the location of the stone, and from 75% to 86% according to the size of the stone. These differences in rate were not significant. Two or three ESWL sessions were required in 79 patients. ESWL was well tolerated in 90% of patients. The only complication was a case of pyelonephritis requiring the placement of a JJ stent, administration of antibiotics, and distant ureteroscopy. The 36 patients, in whom ESWL failed, underwent ureteroscopy (n=23) or lithotripsy with a Dornier machine (n=13). CONCLUSION: Non-deferred ESWL for acute renal colic secondary to obstructing ureteral stones has a satisfactory success rate and very low morbidity.     

Management of ureteral stones by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. 3 years of experience

From April 1985 to March 1987 181 patients with ureteral stones were treated by means of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Management for proximal calculi changed from in situ ESWL treatment (group n = 27) or placement of a ureteral catheter below calculi (group II, n = 30) to retrograde stone manipulation into renal pelvis (group IV, n = 52) or ESWL treatment under intraoperative irrigation of saline in cases where repositioning failed (group III, n = 50). The best stone-free rate for upper ureteral stones was obtained in group IV with 96% after 6 weeks, presenting also the shortest hospital stay (4.2 days) and lowest quota of postoperative auxiliary procedures (2%). Stones, not being dislodged into renal pelvis (49%), could be treated successfully in 86% by irrigation with saline during ESWL (group III). The stone-free rate decreased in patients with in situ treatment (group I: 67%) or ureteral catheter placement (group II: 83%). Treatment of these stones increased the need of postoperative ancillary procedures to approximately 30%. For distal ureteral stones ESWL and preoperative Zeiss placement achieved a stone-free rate of 95%.     

患肾不显影输尿管结石的ESWL治疗

目的　总结由输尿管结石梗阻引起患侧肾脏不显影者行ESWL治疗的临床经验。　方法　输尿管结石致急性绞痛患者 16 8例 ,ESWL术前行KUB和IVU检查明确诊断输尿管结石而患侧肾脏不显影。结石位于髂骨缘以上者采用仰卧位 ,髂骨缘以下者采用俯卧位治疗。对 10 4例病史 <1个月、年龄 <6 0岁者于结石排空后行IVU ,观察其肾功能恢复情况。　结果　 16 8例患者全部于 2周内排空结石 ,其中 10 4例在结石排空后 1周～ 1年复查IVU ,患侧肾均已显影 ,2例仍有肾盂轻度积水。　结论　输尿管结石急性发病时 ,可因肾内压力骤增而引起肾功能受损 ,表现为患侧肾不显影。这种损害是可逆的 ,及时解除梗阻可使患肾功能得到恢复 ,ESWL是有效措施之一     

ESWL治疗尿路结石1380例报告

报告应用国产NSJ-15型水囊式碎石机治疗尿路结石1380例,其中肾结石535例,输尿管结石744例,肾伴输尿管结石90例,膀胱及后尿道结石12例。碎石率为99.06％,三个月结石排净率肾结石为92.84％,输尿管结石为92.43％。并对71例结石进行红外光谱分析以探讨结石成分与碎石效果的关系;对85例病人碎石前后尿液NAG酶测定以了解冲击波对肾脏损害情况。主张输尿管结石尽量采用原位治疗。     

Clinical study of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for 1000 patients with renal and ureteral stones

Using a Dornier HM3 lithotripter, we treated 1,000 patients with renal and ureteral stones from April, 1986 to July, 1989. They consisted of 612 solitary stones (pelvic stones, 152; calyceal stones, 167; ureteral stones, 293), 265 multiple stones and 123 staghorn calculi (complete, 48; partial, 75). The overall rate of the auxiliary procedure was 59.3% (pre-operative, 47.9%; post-operative, 11.4%). Pre-operative procedure included 430 catheterizations, 26 percutaneous nephrostomies (PNSs) and 23 pyelograms . Post-operative procedure included 69 transurethral lithotripsy , 21 PNSs, 26 percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PNLs), 6 meatotomy , 5 chemolysis and 1 open surgery. 484 (68.3%) in 709 good follow-up cases were stone-free at the time of 3 months since the first extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Complications were pain (34.8%), fever (4.3%), pain & fever (8.5%), subcapsular hematoma (0.1%) and ureteral obstruction (0.1%). Thus, ESWL is considered to be a useful means for renal and ureteral stones and in the case of large stone the combination therapy with PNL is more effective than ESWL-monotherapy.     

Two years clinical experiences with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy and transurethral ureterolithotripsy for ureteral stones at Osaka City University Hospital

From July 1985 to June 1987, 303 patients with ureteral stones were treated by either extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) or transurethral ureterolithotripsy (TUL). The ureteral stones were classified into two groups, upper and lower ureteral stones. The upper ureteral stone was defined as a stone located above the pelvic brim in radiological examinations. ESWL was performed using a Dornier lithotriptor HM-3. For TUL, following the insertion of a guide wire and dilatation of the intramural ureter by ureteral bougie, a ureteroscope was introduced into the ureter. The success rate included both patients who became stone free and patients whose stones were disintegrated into less than 4 mm. The success rate of ESWL for upper ureteral stones was 90%, and 8.5% were treated subsequently by TUL. The success rate of TUL for upper ureteral stones was 42%, and the remaining required another session of TUL or another procedure, mainly ESWL. On the other hand, the success rate of TUL for lower ureteral stones was 71%, and the remainder also required another session of TUL or another procedure, mainly ESWL. The efficacy of TUL for stone street was comparably low by the evaluation done at 5 days after the procedure. However, almost all patients with stone street, which had developed after ESWL treatment, became stone free several weeks after TUL and insertion of a stent catheter. Major complications or side effects for ESWL were fever of more than 37.5 degrees C (7.5%) and pain attacks (8.9%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Prospective randomized evaluation of emergency extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) on the short-time outcome of symptomatic ureteral stones

OBJECTIVE: Here, we report the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the efficacy of emergency ESWL (eESWL) on the short-term outcome of symptomatic ureteral stones. MATERIAL: The trial enrolled 100 patients admitted in emergency room for renal colic caused by a ureteral radioopaque [corrected] stone. Patients were randomized to medical therapy alone or combined with eESWL. eESWL was performed within 6 hours of the onset of renal colic without specific analgesia on a Lithostar lithotripter (Siemens Medical, Munich, Germany). The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients stone free rate after 48 hours (SF-48) and the cumulative proportion of patients discharged from the hospital after 48 and 72 hours. RESULTS: Ureteral stone's location was proximal and distal in respectively 46% and 54% of the patients; stone's mean size was 5.5 mm (range 2-10 mm). Median hospital stay was 3 days, ranging from 1 to 14 days. SF-48 in the control group varied from 76% for distal stones <5 mm to 28.6% for proximal stones >5 mm, averaging at 61%. On average, eESWL increased SF-48 by 13% (p: 0.126), the gain strictly depending on stone size and location. SF-48 increase ranged from 40% for proximal stones >5 mm to 1.8% for distal stone <5 mm. On average, eESWL increased the median duration of hospital stay by one day. This mean negative impact results from ESWL increasing significantly the duration of hospital stay in case of distal stone, while slightly shortened it for stones located proximally. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated for the first time that rapidly performed ESWL is a valuable therapeutic option to improve elimination of ureteral stones and shorten duration of hospital stay, proven that the stone is located proximally to the iliac vessels.     

Noninvasive management of obstructing ureteral stones using electromagnetic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

Background Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) represents noninvasive management of urolithiasis. Since the first HM3 model, technological progress has improved the efficacy and safety of this treatment. The current study aimed to evaluate the role of ESWL as a first-line emergency therapy of renal colic due to ureteral stone with impaired renal function. Methods This prospective study enrolled all the patients admitted from the emergency room with acute renal colic meeting the following criteria: serum creatinine level ranging from 1.5 to 2.5 mg/dl, hydronephrosis, ureteral stones 6 to 15 mm in size, body mass index less than 30, normal renal function at baseline, and no evidence of urinary tract infection. The patients were submitted to a single-session emergency treatment using Dornier Litothripter S. Follow-up assessment, performed at 24 and 72 h, included radiologic and ultrasound examinations with renal function serum assessment. The end points were a decrease in creatinine level and a stone-free condition. Results A total of 40 patients were eligible for the study. The mean creatinine level at admission was 1.93 ± 0.26 mg/dl. After the treatment, renal function recovery occurred for 34 subjects (85%), with a significant global decrease in creatinine levels (p = 0.00). The global stone-free rate 72 h after SWL was 67.5% (27/40). The patients with residual fragments were managed using re-SWL (n = 7) and endoscopic technique (n = 6). Conclusions Emergency SWL represents an effective tool in the treatment of ureteral stones with hydronephrosis and slight renal impairment. Although complete stone clearance after one treatment still remains a difficult target, the actual role of SWL in the management of acute obstruction is to obtain ureteral canalization and renal function recovery. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Rapid extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for proximal ureteral calculi in colic versus noncolic patients

OBJECTIVES: In delayed extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) treatment, increasing stone impaction is associated with delayed stone clearance. Whether colic patients treated by rapid ESWL have the same time to stone clearance as noncolic patients, which supports the thesis that stones in both groups are nonimpacted, has not been investigated yet, and was the objective of this study. METHODS: A total of 82 patients were prospectively enrolled and treated with piezoelectric ESWL for a solitary proximal ureteral stone. Of these, 56 patients experienced at least one colic episode compared with 26 noncolic patients. Hydronephrosis has been assessed with the use of ultrasound and intravenous urography (IVU). Time to stone clearance after the first ESWL and stone-free rates after a follow-up period of 3 mo were recorded. RESULTS: In colic and noncolic patients, mean stone size was 7.8mm (p=0.7). Ultrasound-detected hydronephrosis was present in 88% versus 39% (p<0.0001), whereas IVU-detected hydronephrosis was present in 60% versus 7.7% (p=0.0001). Mean number of impulses applied was 8000+/-4000 versus 6700+/-3400 (p=0.1). Mean time to stone clearance was 9.5+/-12.1 d versus 4.6+/-3.8 d (p=0.1). Colic and noncolic patients were considered as treatment success in 83% and 81% after 3 mo of follow-up (p=0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment outcome and time to stone clearance after rapid ESWL in colic patients compared with noncolic patients is comparable and independent of concomitant hydronephrosis. This finding suggests an absence of significant impaction in proximal ureteral stones treated within 24h after a first colic episode, enforcing the concept of performing rapid ESWL in patients harbouring proximal ureteral stones.     

Noninvasive anesthesia,analgesia and radiation-free extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for stones in the most distal ureter: experience with 165 patients

PURPOSE: Spontaneous ureteral stone passage often causes severe renal colic, especially when the stone passes through the narrow ureteral orifice. In these situations noninvasive anesthesia-free, analgesia-free and radiation-free extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (Dornier Medical Systems, Marietta, Georgia) is a valuable tool. It can be performed at any time without needing any further patient preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 165 patients underwent ESWL using the Lithostar Ultra device (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). Only ureteral calculi within 5 cm. of the ureterovesical junction were included in this study. Patients were treated while supine and stones were localized by ultrasound through the filled bladder without x-ray exposure. Treatment was started without anesthesia or analgesia and analgesics were administered only at patient request during treatment. RESULTS: Of the patients 93% were treated without anesthesia or analgesia and 7% required a single intravenous dose of 25 mg. pethidine. Postoperatively renal colic developed in 40 patients (24%). In 4 cases (2.4%) renal drainage was required for analgesia resistant pain or obstructive pyelonephritis. On day 1 after ESWL 90% of the patients were stone-free or had fragments 2 mm. or less, while 10% had residual fragments 3 mm. or greater. Of all patients 7% were re-treated once. At 3 months postoperatively 129 of the 130 evaluable patients (99%) were stone-free. CONCLUSIONS: ESWL of stones located in the most distal ureter using the Lithostar Ultra device is effective, safe and radiation-free. It is done without anesthesia and in most cases without analgesics. This simple and noninvasive procedure is an excellent first line treatment modality for prevesical stones and it represents a valid alternative to conservative management or invasive endoscopy.     

移植肾尿路结石46例诊治体会

目的探讨肾移植术后尿路结石的诊断和治疗,提高长期存活率。方法回顾性分析1980年1月至2011年6月46例移植肾结石患者的临床资料。结果 35例为肉眼血尿,10例为体检时B超发现,1例为急性无尿发病,均无肾绞痛。移植肾结石24例,移植输尿管结石22例,结石大小0.7～2.0 cm,结石发病时间为术后3.5（0.4～15）年。42例行体外冲击波碎石（ES-WL）,其中3例无效行输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术和1例行经皮肾镜取石术（PCNL）,4例尿酸结石给予枸橼酸氢钾钠（友来特）药物治疗。随访3个月：42例ESWL中,结石排净36例（85.72%）,结石残留2例（4.76%）,4例（9.52%）无效改用腔镜治疗后结石排出;4例尿酸结石口服枸橼酸氢钾钠结石大部分排出。结论移植肾结石缺乏典型肾绞痛表现,体外冲击波碎石术是治疗移植肾结石安全、有效的主要方法。     

A new method for the management of ureteral colic after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

In ten patients, who underwent ESWL of renal calculi and had severe ureteral colic due to acute obturation of the ureteral lumen by larger stone fragments, i.v. glucagon injections combined with laevulose infusion were applied. All patients reported relief of pain and discomfort within 15-20 minutes after glucagon injection. Position of the stones in the ureter was regularly checked. No particular adverse effects of glucagon were noted. Glucagon increases GFR and diuresis and exhibits spasmolytic effect on the smooth muscle of the ureteral wall, thus facilitating the passage of stone fragments after ESWL. In certain cases and with certain indications we recommend the method as highly effective.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal and ureteral calculi with MPL-9000. Correlation between stone burden and shock wave energy]

Clinical results of ESWL for renal and ureteral stone with MPL-9000 were presented. We also reviewed correlation between stone burden and shock wave energy. We studied 210 cases (295 sessions) of renal stone and 109 cases (154 sessions) of ureteral stone that were treated from November 1988 till January 1989 and from November 1989 till May 1990. Of those sessions, 76 sessions of renal stone cases and 53 of ureteral stone cases were carried out ambulatorily. Successful disintegration (within 4 mm) rate was 86% of renal stones, 84% of ureteral stones, and stone free rate after 6 months was 72% of renal stones and 84% of ureteral stones. As for the complications, brain infarction occurred in one case, subcapsular hematoma of the kidney in one, and arythmia in 5. No other severe side effects were observed. Between shock wave energy (the number of shock wave shots x voltage) and stone burden (long axis x short axis of the stone), a significant correlation was found in renal stone cases, but not in ureteral stone cases. E/B (shock wave energy/stone burden) was 33,100 (kv.shots/cm2) for the renal stone and 56,000 (kv.shots/cm2) for the ureteral stone. These results suggest that there is still another unknown factor, which is not related with renal stone, for successful disintegration of ureteral stone. We also confirmed that more energy is necessary for destruction of ureteral stone than for that of renal stone.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy with Lithostar lithotriptor.

Initial experience of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) using the Lithostar lithotriptor is reported; 193 patients underwent 248 treatments for 210 stones. A total of 139 renal calculi (126 patients) and 71 ureteral stones (67 patients) were analyzed. Treatments were performed without anesthesia in 65 calculi (27.6%), with intravenous sedation in 91 (42.5%), and under epidural anesthesia in 34 calculi (29.9%). A three-month follow-up showed a success rate of 88.0 percent for renal calculi and 95.5 percent for ureteral calculi treated in situ. Renal stone fragmentation was achieved with a mean of 4,890 shocks at 17.4 kV and ureteral calculi were fragmented with a mean number of 4,798 shocks at a mean of 18.3 kV. Auxiliary procedures after ESWL were required in 2 patients with renal stones and in 1 with ureteral calculi. A comparison between stone size and number of shock waves required to achieve stone fragmentation revealed a linear relationship. Hospitalization was not necessary in 84.4 percent of renal calculi and 89.6 percent of ureteral calculi. Retreatments were necessary in 22 (15.8%) of the renal calculi (18 had 2 sessions, 3 had 3 sessions, and 1 had 4 sessions). Of the ureteral calculi, 8 (11.3%) underwent retreatment (6 had 2 sessions, 1 had 3 sessions, and 1 had 4 sessions). The low morbidity with a large number of patients treated on an outpatient basis, minimizing the need for anesthesia, demonstrated a favorable initial successful experience with the Lithostar.     

Immediate in situ ESWL as monotherapy in acute obstructive urolithiasis: useful or not?

Thirty-two patients with acute obstructive urolithiasis were treated without intervention (stent, nephrostomy tube) within 72 hours after onset of symptoms by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Relief of obstruction, proven sonographically, was obtained within 48 hours in 78.6% of the patients and 90.6% were stone-free 6 weeks after treatment. Best results were obtained for proximal ureteral stones while the influence of stone volume did not appear to be significant. Whereas our stone-free results for treatment of calculi smaller than 5 mm (92.3%) can be criticized because without treatment these stones may pass spontaneously, a high success rate for larger stones (89.4%) was also noted. These results for in situ ESWL compare favorably to those of ESWL with stent bypass and suggest that ESWL monotherapy should be considered as a noninvasive first line therapy when treating acute obstructive urolithiasis.     

Improvement of stone comminution by slow delivery rate of shock waves in extracorporeal lithotripsy

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of delivery rate of shockwaves (SW) on stone comminution and treatment outcomes in patients with renal and ureteral stones. METHODS: Patients with radio-opaque stones in the upper urinary tract that were treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) were divided into two groups according to delivery rate (120 or 60 SW/min). The effective fragmentation after one ESWL session and treatment success at 3 months after ESWL was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Of 134 patients (84 men and 50 women), 68 patients were treated at a fast rate and 66 were treated at a slow rate. Thirty and 38 patients in the fast rate group and 28 and 38 in the slow rate group had renal and ureteral stones, respectively. After one ESWL session, effective fragmentation was noted more often in the slow group (65.2%) than the fast group (47.1%) (P = 0.035), particularly for smaller stones (stone area <100 mm(2)) (P = 0.005) and renal stones (p = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference in treatment success at 3 months after ESWL between the two groups. In univariate logistic regression analysis, slow SW rate and smaller stones were significant factors for effective fragmentation after one ESWL session. In multivariate analysis, slow SW rate and smaller stones were also independent factors. CONCLUSIONS: Slow SW rate contributed to better stone comminution than fast rate, particularly for small stones and renal stones. ESWL treatment at a slow SW rate is recommended to obtain efficient stone fragmentation.     

中段输尿管结石的原位体外冲击波碎石

目的 报告电磁式体外冲击波原位治疗中段输尿管结石疗效。方法 患者５４例,结石直径为５－２０ｍｍ,平均１１ｍｍ。ＥＳＷＬ治疗时经侧腹部入路并采用工能量冲击技术。工作电压２－７档,发射次数每序列３０００－５０００次,治疗结果代入效率商公式测算。结果 碎石治疗３个月内无石率为９６％,复震率３０％,效率商７４％。