Download PDF
Aktuelle Urol 2013; 44(04): 277-279
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1345204
Originalarbeit
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Akzidentielle Zerstörung von Steinfangkörben: Neue Erkenntnisse zur Interaktion von Körben, „Stone trapping devices“, Guidewire und Lithotriptoren – eine Kurzübersicht

Accidental Destruction of Stone Trapping Baskets: New Knowledge on the Interaction of Baskets, Stone Trapping Devices, Guide Wires and Lithotriptors – A Brief Review
J. Cordes
1   Klinik für Urologie, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein
,
M. Sommerauer
1   Klinik für Urologie, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein
,
J. M. Laturnus
1   Klinik für Urologie, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein
,
D. Jocham
1   Klinik für Urologie, UKSH Campus Lübeck, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
01 July 2013 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Das Steinleiden hat in den Industrienationen deutlich zugenommen und somit wird auch die Zahl der endourolgischen Steinbehandlungen weiter steigen. Hierbei wird es neben der gewollten Steinzerstörung immer wieder auch zu Zerstörungen von endourologischen Instrumenten kommen. In einer Datenbankrecherche wurden Artikel zu dieser Problematik gesucht. Dieser Übersichtsartikel zeigt den aktuellen Stand der Forschung und versucht praktische Lösungsansätze aufzuzeigen. Zusätzlich soll ein Blick in die Zukunft geworfen werden.

Abstract

There is a rise in the incidence of stone disease in the industrial nations. Due to this, the number of endurological procedures will also rise. Sometimes endourological instruments will be fragmented accidentally together with the destruction of the stone. A search for articles on this subject was performed. The aim of this article is to provide a review about the literature on this subject and how this subject can be managed today and in the future.

Schlüsselwörter

Lithotripsie - Laser - Sicherheit

Key words

lithotripsy - laser - safety
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Hesse A, Brändle E, Wilbert D et al. Study on the prevalence and incidence of urolithiasis in germany comparing the years 1979 vs. 2000. Eur Urol 2003; 44: 709-713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Stamatelou KK, Francis ME, Jones CA et al. Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States: 1976-1994. Kidney Int 2003; 63: 1817-1823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Pearle MS. Shock-wave lithotripsy for renal calculi. N Engl J Med 2012; 367: 50-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Elashry OM, Elgasmasy AK, Sabaa MA et al. Ureteroscopic management of lower ureteric calculi: a 15-year single-centre experience. BJU Int 2008; 102: 1010-1017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cordes J, Jocham D, Kausch I. Endourologische Steinlithotripsie: Akzidentielle Zerstörung von Dormiakörbchen und Guidewire-eine Kurzübersicht. Der Urologe 2010; 49: 1365-1367
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gallentine ML, Bishoff JT, Harmon WJ. The broken stone basket: Configuration and technique for removal. J Endourol 2001; 15: 911-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Honeck P, Wendt-Nordahl G, Häcker A et al. Risk of collateral damage to endourologic tools by holmium:YAG laser energy. J Endourol 2006; 20: 495-497
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cordes J, Lange B, Jocham D et al. Destruction of stone extraction basket during an in vitro lithotripsy- a comparison of four lithotripters. J Endourol 2011; 25: 1359-1362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Olbert PJ, Keil C, Weber J et al. Efficacy and safety of the Accordion stone-trapping device. In vitro results from an artificial ureterolithotripsy model. Urol Res 2010; 38: 41-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Dretler SP. Ureteroscopy for proximal ureteral calculi: prevention of stone migration. J Endourol 2000; 14: 565-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dretler SP. The Stone Cone: a new generation of baskertry. J Urol 2002; 165: 1593-1596
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dretler SP. Prevention of retrograde stone migration during ureteroscopy. Nat Clin Pract Urol 2006; 3: 60-61 No abstract available
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cordes J, Nguyen F, Heidenau F et al. Could titanium oxide coating from a sol-gel process make stone baskets more resistant to laser radiation at 2.1 mum? J Negat Results Biomed. 2012; 11: 15
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Salimi N, Mahajan A, Don J et al. A novel stone retrieval basket for more efficient lithotripsy procedures. J Med Eng Technol 2009; 33: 142-150
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Hecht V et al. Impact of collateral damage to endourologic tools during laser lithotripsy – in vitro comparison of three different clinical laser systems. J Endourol 2011; 25: 667-672
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Piergiovanni M, Desgrandchamps F, Cochand-Priollet B et al. Ureteral and bladder lesions after ballistic, ultrasonic, electrohydraulic, or laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 1994; 8: 293-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Binbay M, Tepeler A, Singh A et al. Evaluation of pneumatic versus holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted ureteral stones. Int Urol Nephrol 2011; 43: 989
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lange B, Brinkmann R, Jocham D et al. Weißlichreflexionsmessungen zur Stein-/Gewebedifferenzierung in der Endourologie. in Dresdner Beiträge zur Medizintechnik 2012; 14: 37-40
    PubMedGoogle Scholar