Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39254129›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of urology2024

Break Wave Lithotripsy for Urolithiasis: Results of the First-in-Human International Multi-Institutional Clinical Trial.

Ben H Chew, Jonathan D Harper, Roger L Sur, Thomas Chi, Shubha De, Anne R Buckley, Ryan F Paterson, Victor K F Wong, Connor M Forbes, M Kennedy Hall and 10 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03811171 (A Study of the SonoMotion Break Wave), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03811171 narecruitingnot on this map

A Study of the SonoMotion Break Wave(TM) System for the Comminution of Urinary Tract Stones

TypeinterventionalSponsorSonoMotionRan2019 to 2027Enrolled70ConditionsRenal Calculi, Urinary CalculiArmsBreak Wave extracorporeal lithotripsy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Round up.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Ben H ChewDepartment of Urological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Stone Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5315-0710
Jonathan D HarperDepartment of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Roger L SurDepartment of Urology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California.
Thomas ChiDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.ORCID 0000-0003-2127-2673
Shubha DeDepartment of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6516-3749
Anne R BuckleyDepartment of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Stone Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8289-6650
Ryan F PatersonDepartment of Urological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Stone Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Victor K F WongDepartment of Urological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Stone Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Connor M ForbesDepartment of Urological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Stone Centre at Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8541-3909
M Kennedy HallDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0002-0803-1552
Ross KesslerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0001-9969-7693
Seth K BechisDepartment of Urology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California.ORCID 0000-0002-2430-2893
Jason R WooDepartment of Urology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California.
Ralph C WangDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.ORCID 0000-0001-5382-9486
David B BayneDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Derek BochinskiDepartment of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Trevor D SchulerDepartment of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9691-3151
Tim A WollinDepartment of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4131-4423
Rahim SamjiDepartment of Urology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Mathew D SorensenDepartment of Urology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

First-In-Human Feasibility Trial of Break Wave - The Office-Based Lithotripsy SolutionR44DK109779 · NIDDK · SONOMOTION, INC. · PI LEVY, OREN · 2016 to 2021
$4.6M
NIDDK NIH HHS R44 DK109779
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study reports on a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, clinical trial utilizing the SonoMotion (San Mateo, California) Break Wave lithotripsy (BWL) device to fragment urinary stones. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients with a urinary stone underwent a single treatment of 30 minutes and peak negative pressure of 4.5 to 8 MPa. Subjects were contacted and outcomes assessed at 7, 14, and 35 days after treatment, with clinical follow-up and CT imaging 70 ± 14 days postprocedure. The primary objectives were to assess the safety (hematomas, complications, etc) and effectiveness of BWL (any fragmentation, residual fragments ≤4 mm or ≤2 mm, and completely stone-free rate) as assessed via noncontrast CT-kidneys, ureters, and bladder.

resultsForty-four patients with a ureteral (43%) or renal (57%) stone were treated across 5 centers. Stone fragmentation occurred in 88% of cases; 70% had fragments ≤ 4 and 51% ≤ 2 mm, while 49% were completely stone free on CT; no serious adverse events were reported. Eighty-six percent of patients received either no analgesic medication at all (50%) or minor analgesia (36%). After determining optimal therapy settings, 36 patients were treated and the effectiveness improved exhibiting fragmentation in 92% (33/36), residual fragments ≤ 4 mm in 75% and 58% with fragments ≤ 2 mm with 58% completely stone free. Effectiveness was less in subjects with lower pole stones with 81% fragmentation, 71% having fragments ≤ 4 mm, 29% with fragments ≤ 2 mm, and 29% completely stone free; of distal ureteral stone patients, 89% were completely stone free.

conclusionsBWL offered safe and effective noninvasive stone therapy requiring little to no anesthesia and was carried out successfully in nonoperative environments.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03811171.

Indexed as

InternationalityLithotripsyUrolithiasisAdultAgedFemaleHumansKidney CalculiMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUreteral Calculicalculilithotripsyultrasoundurolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID39254129
PMCPMC12721640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.