1992
DOI: 10.1089/end.1992.6.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lithotripter Technology: Present and Future

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
6

Year Published

1995
1995
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
19
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…The general principle in lens modification and associated implementation strategy described in this work are also applicable to design improvement of other EM lithotripters equipped with either convex lenses (37) or parabolic reflectors (38). The design and technical refinements of EM lithotripters from the late 1980s to middle 1990s were largely driven by empirical experience, practical concern for user convenience, and multifunctionality of the lithotripter system (39,40). The transition of SWL technology during this period from EH to predominately EM was carried out by lithotripter manufacturers with an incomplete understanding about the mechanisms of tissue injury and stone comminution in SWL (41).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The general principle in lens modification and associated implementation strategy described in this work are also applicable to design improvement of other EM lithotripters equipped with either convex lenses (37) or parabolic reflectors (38). The design and technical refinements of EM lithotripters from the late 1980s to middle 1990s were largely driven by empirical experience, practical concern for user convenience, and multifunctionality of the lithotripter system (39,40). The transition of SWL technology during this period from EH to predominately EM was carried out by lithotripter manufacturers with an incomplete understanding about the mechanisms of tissue injury and stone comminution in SWL (41).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…New machines are more user-friendly (for patient and clinician), but have lower efficacy than the original HM3 lithotriptor [5,6]. The poorer treatment outcome which is observed with latest lithotriptors may be due to various factors including changes in power source, coupling mechanism, focal zone size and peak pressure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 25 patients further measures had to be performed. The calculated efficiency quotient (EQ) at the time of the last follow-up was 52 (modified EQ 46) [6].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%