You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Surgical Therapy IV1 Apr 2018MP68-13 THE NEXT GENERATION: IN VITRO COMPARISON OF A NOVEL SINGLE-PROBE DUAL-ENERGY LITHOTRIPTER TO CURRENT DEVICES Daniel Wollin, Evan Carlos, Brenton Winship, Michael Gustafson, Westin Tom, Daniela Radvak, Ruiyang Jiang, Charles Scales, Michael Ferrandino, W Neal Simmons, Glenn Preminger, and Michael Lipkin Daniel WollinDaniel Wollin More articles by this author , Evan CarlosEvan Carlos More articles by this author , Brenton WinshipBrenton Winship More articles by this author , Michael GustafsonMichael Gustafson More articles by this author , Westin TomWestin Tom More articles by this author , Daniela RadvakDaniela Radvak More articles by this author , Ruiyang JiangRuiyang Jiang More articles by this author , Charles ScalesCharles Scales More articles by this author , Michael FerrandinoMichael Ferrandino More articles by this author , W Neal SimmonsW Neal Simmons More articles by this author , Glenn PremingerGlenn Preminger More articles by this author , and Michael LipkinMichael Lipkin More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.2217AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The LithoClast Trilogy (ElectroMedical Systems (EMS)) is a novel single-probe, dual-energy lithotripter with ultrasonic (US) vibration and electromagnetic impact force. The ShockPulse (Olympus) and LithoClast Select (EMS) are existing lithotripters that also use a combination of US and mechanical impactor. Our aim was to compare the in vitro efficacy of these devices in stone clearance and fixed-weight drilling and characterize the tip motion of the new device. METHODS 1 cm3 15:3 Begostones mimicking calcium oxalate monohydrate stones were used in all trials. Test groups were Trilogy, ShockPulse, Select US only and Select US/pneumatic. For clearance testing, a stone was placed in a submerged hemispherical silicone support. Each lithotripter was used by hand to fragment one stone with 300cc/min of suction and comparable energy settings. Time to stone clearance was recorded; 10 trials were performed per device. For drill testing, a hands-free apparatus with a submerged balance was used to apply 1 or 2lbs of pressure on a stone in contact with the device tip. 10 trials were performed per device; 5 at each weight. Active device tip motion was assessed using high-speed photography. RESULTS Clearance tests revealed differences between groups by one-way ANOVA (p=0.001). The Select US/Pneumatic was slowest and Trilogy fastest by Tukey′s HSD (p<0.01). For drill testing, one-way ANOVA was significant at both 1 and 2lbs (p<0.0001, p=0.035, respectively). At 1lb, the Select US-only was slowest by Tukey′s HSD (p=0 .001). At 2lbs, the ShockPulse was faster than the Select US-only (p=0.027), but did not significantly outpace the Trilogy or Select US/pneumatic. At either weight, there was no significant difference between the Trilogy and ShockPulse (Figure). High-speed photography illustrates up to 0.04mm tip displacement during ultrasonic movement in the Trilogy relative to 0.02mm in the ShockPulse. Both devices demonstrated about 0.25mm impactor movements. CONCLUSIONS In an in-vitro setting, the novel Lithoclast Trilogy was more efficient than currently available devices at stone clearance. Drill testing revealed no difference between the Trilogy and the ShockPulse. High-speed imaging shows greater displacement in ultrasonic movement of the Trilogy which may explain the observed results. © 2018FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 199Issue 4SApril 2018Page: e921-e922 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2018MetricsAuthor Information Daniel Wollin More articles by this author Evan Carlos More articles by this author Brenton Winship More articles by this author Michael Gustafson More articles by this author Westin Tom More articles by this author Daniela Radvak More articles by this author Ruiyang Jiang More articles by this author Charles Scales More articles by this author Michael Ferrandino More articles by this author W Neal Simmons More articles by this author Glenn Preminger More articles by this author Michael Lipkin More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...