search
Back to results

Narrow Versus Wide Focal Zones for Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Renal Calculi

Primary Purpose

Kidney Stones

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Canada
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
SWL: Shock Wave Lithotripsy Intervention
Sponsored by
Unity Health Toronto
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Kidney Stones focused on measuring SWL, kidney stones, renal calculi

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Stone must be radiopaque on a KUB (kidney, ureter and bladder) radiograph, and located within the renal collecting system.
  • Patients must have had a CT scan within the past 30 days.
  • Stones must be solitary, between 5 and 15 mm in maximal diameter.
  • Patient must consent to the trial and be willing to return to their respective lithotripsy unit at 2 weeks and 3 months for follow-up.
  • Patients must be treated on the Storz Modulith SLX-F2 machine

Exclusion Criteria:

  • More than one renal calculus on the treated side.
  • Radiolucent stones (uric acid, indinavir) or cystine stones.
  • Stone size < 5 mm and > 15 mm.
  • Previous surgical intervention on upper tracts within past five years.
  • Congenital anatomic anomalies of the kidney, ureters or bladder (such as calyceal diverticulum, horseshoe kidney, etc.)
  • Patient currently taking an α-blocker (alfuzosin, terazosin, doxazosin, tamsulosin, prazosin), calcium channel blocker (verapamil, diltiazem, nifedipine, nicardipine, bepridil, mibefradil), or corticosteroids.
  • Pregnancy.
  • Age < 18 years.
  • Active urinary tract infection.
  • Patient exceed weight limit for SWL table (>500 lbs)
  • Previous SWL treatment for this stone.
  • Uncorrected coagulopathy

Sites / Locations

  • Vancouver General Hospital, Jim Pattison Pavilion G floor station 5 GI/GU Lithotripsy suite
  • St. Joseph's Hospital, University of Western Ontario
  • St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Lithotripsy suite, 5th floor Cardinal Carter North Wing

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm 4

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Active Comparator

Active Comparator

Active Comparator

Arm Label

A (Narrow focus, LP)

B (Wide focus, LP)

C (Narrow focus, no LP)

D (Wide focus, no LP)

Arm Description

A (Narrow focus): stone is in lower pole of kidney and SWL using narrow focus on lithotripter

B: stone is in lower pole of kidney and SWL using wide focus on lithotripter

C: stone is in no-lower pole of kidney and SWL using narrow focus on lithotripter

D: stone is in no-lower pole of kidney and SWL using wide focus on lithotripter

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

SWL efficiency quotient comparison between narrow focus vs wide focus
Comparison of single-treatment lithotripsy success rates at 2 and 12 weeks post-lithotripsy. Successful treatment will be defined as either stone-free status or presence of clinically insignificant asymptomatic residual fragments ≤ 4 mm. SWL efficiency quotient for the treatment groups, as calculated by the standardized formula: % stone-free divided by (100 + % re-treated + % auxiliary procedures).

Secondary Outcome Measures

Incidence of perirenal hematomas
Comparing the narrow and wide foci for the presence of perirenal hematomas post treatment on ultrasound.
Biomarkers for renal injury
Comparisons of urinary markers for identifying renal injury
Time to stone passage
Time it took to pass the stone for both arms will be compared for the 3 month follow up time.
Pain will be compared between narrow vs wide focus arms
Visual analog pain scores will be compared between arms.
Complication rates
Complication rates will be compared between narrow and wide focus treatment arms.

Full Information

First Posted
October 20, 2010
Last Updated
October 4, 2017
Sponsor
Unity Health Toronto
Collaborators
University of Toronto, University of Western Ontario, Canada, University of British Columbia
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT01226875
Brief Title
Narrow Versus Wide Focal Zones for Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Renal Calculi
Official Title
Multicentred, Randomized Control Trial Comparing Narrow Versus Wide Focal Zones for Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Renal Calculi
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
October 2017
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
January 2011 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
November 2016 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 2017 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Unity Health Toronto
Collaborators
University of Toronto, University of Western Ontario, Canada, University of British Columbia

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is a safe, non-invasive treatment for renal calculi. During SWL energy is focused on in order to break kidney stones and this energy can be varied in size from a narrow (or small) focal zone to a wide (or large) focal zone. This is a multi-centered, randomized study comparing the single treatment success rates of narrow and wide focal zones during SWL.
Detailed Description
Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is a safe and non-invasive treatment for kidney stones. The SWL machine that is currently in use has a unique feature: the focal zone or the energy that the SWL energy is focused on in order to break kidney stones can be varied in size from a narrow (or small) focal zone to a wide (or large) focal zone. Previous lithotripters have only offered one focal size that corresponded to a narrow range. The objective of this study is to compare the single-treatment success rates of narrow and wide focal zones for the shock wave lithotripsy of renal stones between 5 and 15 mm in greatest diameter, while maintaining a constant overall lithotripsy energy level. A wide focal zone may offer some trade-offs when compared with the traditional narrow focal zone: since the area being treated is larger, it is more likely that the stone will receive adequate energy as it moves with patient breathing during treatment, and less energy per cubic inch will be delivered to the kidney around the stone (which might lead to a lower degree of renal injury); on the other hand less energy per cubic inch will also be delivered to the stone, so that stone fragmentation might be inferior to that with a narrow focal zone. Thus, with this study we want to determine whether there is a significant difference in both stone fragmentation and in renal injury (as measured by the incidence of post-treatment renal hematoma or bruises, and by measuring urinary markers indicating the degree of renal cellular damage). Aside from the random choice of focal zone size, there will be no change to the standard of care for lithotripsy treatment. We predict that the narrow focal shock zone will result in superior stone fragmentation, with higher single-treatment stone free and success rates. However, we may identify a slight increased incidence in the rate of subcapsular renal hematoma and renal damage, as detected by urinary markers.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Kidney Stones
Keywords
SWL, kidney stones, renal calculi

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
275 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
A (Narrow focus, LP)
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
A (Narrow focus): stone is in lower pole of kidney and SWL using narrow focus on lithotripter
Arm Title
B (Wide focus, LP)
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
B: stone is in lower pole of kidney and SWL using wide focus on lithotripter
Arm Title
C (Narrow focus, no LP)
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
C: stone is in no-lower pole of kidney and SWL using narrow focus on lithotripter
Arm Title
D (Wide focus, no LP)
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
D: stone is in no-lower pole of kidney and SWL using wide focus on lithotripter
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
SWL: Shock Wave Lithotripsy Intervention
Intervention Description
Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the most common treatment modality for kidney stones. It is a safe and non-invasive treatment performed on patients under intravenous sedation (light anesthesia) on an out-patient basis, whereby shock waves are generated by a source external to the patient's body and are then propagated into the body and focused on a kidney stone. The unique quality of SWL is in its exploitation of shock wave focusing. The Storz lithotripter is an electromagnetic lithotripter with a unique design that allows for a dual focus system with the option of either a narrow (6x28 mm) or wide (9x50 mm) focal zone, depending on the clinical situation. This is the first lithotripter on the market to allow for two different focal zones for shock wave targeting.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
SWL efficiency quotient comparison between narrow focus vs wide focus
Description
Comparison of single-treatment lithotripsy success rates at 2 and 12 weeks post-lithotripsy. Successful treatment will be defined as either stone-free status or presence of clinically insignificant asymptomatic residual fragments ≤ 4 mm. SWL efficiency quotient for the treatment groups, as calculated by the standardized formula: % stone-free divided by (100 + % re-treated + % auxiliary procedures).
Time Frame
2 and 12 weeks
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Incidence of perirenal hematomas
Description
Comparing the narrow and wide foci for the presence of perirenal hematomas post treatment on ultrasound.
Time Frame
post treatment
Title
Biomarkers for renal injury
Description
Comparisons of urinary markers for identifying renal injury
Time Frame
day 0; day 1; 1 week
Title
Time to stone passage
Description
Time it took to pass the stone for both arms will be compared for the 3 month follow up time.
Time Frame
12 weeks
Title
Pain will be compared between narrow vs wide focus arms
Description
Visual analog pain scores will be compared between arms.
Time Frame
day 0 (post treatment)
Title
Complication rates
Description
Complication rates will be compared between narrow and wide focus treatment arms.
Time Frame
12 weeks

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Stone must be radiopaque on a KUB (kidney, ureter and bladder) radiograph, and located within the renal collecting system. Patients must have had a CT scan within the past 30 days. Stones must be solitary, between 5 and 15 mm in maximal diameter. Patient must consent to the trial and be willing to return to their respective lithotripsy unit at 2 weeks and 3 months for follow-up. Patients must be treated on the Storz Modulith SLX-F2 machine Exclusion Criteria: More than one renal calculus on the treated side. Radiolucent stones (uric acid, indinavir) or cystine stones. Stone size < 5 mm and > 15 mm. Previous surgical intervention on upper tracts within past five years. Congenital anatomic anomalies of the kidney, ureters or bladder (such as calyceal diverticulum, horseshoe kidney, etc.) Patient currently taking an α-blocker (alfuzosin, terazosin, doxazosin, tamsulosin, prazosin), calcium channel blocker (verapamil, diltiazem, nifedipine, nicardipine, bepridil, mibefradil), or corticosteroids. Pregnancy. Age < 18 years. Active urinary tract infection. Patient exceed weight limit for SWL table (>500 lbs) Previous SWL treatment for this stone. Uncorrected coagulopathy
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
John Honey, MD
Organizational Affiliation
St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Ken Pace, MD
Organizational Affiliation
St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Ben Chew, MD
Organizational Affiliation
University of British Columbia - Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Ryan Paterson, MD
Organizational Affiliation
University of British Columbia - Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Hassan Razvi, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Western University, Canada
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Vancouver General Hospital, Jim Pattison Pavilion G floor station 5 GI/GU Lithotripsy suite
City
Vancouver
State/Province
British Columbia
ZIP/Postal Code
V5Z 1M9
Country
Canada
Facility Name
St. Joseph's Hospital, University of Western Ontario
City
London
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
Facility Name
St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Lithotripsy suite, 5th floor Cardinal Carter North Wing
City
Toronto
State/Province
Ontario
ZIP/Postal Code
M5B 1W8
Country
Canada

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Learn more about this trial

Narrow Versus Wide Focal Zones for Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Renal Calculi

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs