banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The use of resonant scattering to identify stone fracture in shock wave lithotripsy
Rent this article for
Access full text Article
1.J. E. Lingeman and J. R. Newmark, “Adverse bioeffects of shock-wave lithotripsy,” in Kidney Stones: Medical and Surgical Management, edited by F. L. Coe et al. (Lippencott-Raven, Philidelphia, 1996), pp. 605614.
2.A. P. Evan, A. R. Willis, J. E. Lingeman, and J. A. McAteer, “Renal trauma and the risk of long-term complications in shock wave lithotripsy,” Nephron0028-2766 78, 18 (1998).
3.P. N. Rao, “Imaging for kidney stones,” World J. Urol.0724-4983 22, 323327 (2004).
4.L. Gao, K. J. Parker, R. M. Lerner, and S. F. Levinson, “Imaging of the elastic properties of tissue—A review,” Ultrasound Med. Biol.0301-5629 22, 959977 (1996).
5.M. Fatemi and J. F. Greenleaf, “Ultrasound-stimulated vibro-acoustic spectrography,” Science0036-8075 280, 8285 (1998).
6.K. Nightingale, M. S. Soo, R. Nightingale, and G. Trahey, “Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: In vivo demonstration of clinical feasibility,” Ultrasound Med. Biol.0301-5629 28, 227235 (2002).
7.A. D. Pierce, Acoustics: An Introduction to its Physical Principles and Applications (Acoustical Society of America, New York, 1991).
8.A. Ishimaru, Wave Propagation and Scattering in Random Media (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1997).
9.P. M. Morse, Vibration and Sound (Acoustical Society of America, New York, 1981).
10.J. L. Thomas, F. Wu, and M. Fink, “Time reversal focusing applied to lithotripsy,” Ultrason. Imaging0161-7346 18, 106121 (1996).
11.C. Bohris, T. Bayer, and C. Lechner, “Hit/miss monitoring of ESWL by spectral Doppler ultrasound,” Ultrasound Med. Biol.0301-5629 5, 705712 (2003).
12.N. R. Owen, M. R. Bailey, A. Maxwell, B. MacConaghy, T. D. Khokhlova, and L. A. Crum, “Vibro-acoustography for targeting kidney stones during lithotripsy,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.0001-4966 116, 2509 (2004).
13.C. C. Chang, I. Manousakas, Y. R. Pu, M. Liang, C. H. Chen, F. M. Yu, W. H. Yang, Y. C. Tong, and C. L. Kuo, “In vitro study of ultrasound based real-time tracking for renal stones in shock wave lithotripsy: Part II—A simulated animal experiement,” J. Urol. (Baltimore)0022-5347 6, 25942957 (2002).
14.F. Fedele, A. J. Coleman, T. G. Leighton, P. R. White, and A. M. Hurrell, “Development of a new diagnostic sensor for extra-corporeal shock-wave lithotripsy,” in Proceedings of the First Mediterranean Conference on Medical and Biological Engineering, “Health in the Information Society,” pp. 134139, (Naples, Italy, 2004).
15.R. O. Cleveland and O. A. Sapozhnikov, “Modeling elastic wave propagation in kidney stones with application to shock wave lithotripsy,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.0001-4966 118, 26672676 (2005).
16.C. C. Church, “A theoretical study of cavitation generated by an extracorporeal shock wave lithotripter,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.0001-4966 86, 215227 (1989).
17.O. A. Sapozhnikov, L. A. Trusov, N. R. Owen, M. R. Bailey, and R. O. Cleveland, “Detecting fragmentation in kidney stones in lithotripsy by means of shock wave scattering,” in Fifth International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound, edited by G. T. Clement, N. J. McDonald, and K. Hynynen (American Institute of Physics, New York, 2005), pp. 308312.
18.R. O. Cleveland, M. R. Bailey, N. Fineberg, B. Hartenbaum, M. Lokhandwalla, J. A. McAteer, and B. Sturtevant, “Design and characterization of a research electrohydraulic lithotripter patterned after the Dornier HM3,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.0001-4966 71, 25142525 (2000).
19.J. A. Ketterling, O. Aristiźabal, D. H. Turnbull, F. L. Lizzi, “Design and fabrication of a annular array transducer,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control0885-3010 52, 672681 (2005).
20.T. G. Leighton, The Acoustic Bubble (Academic, London, 1994).
21.P. Kaczkowski, B. Cunitz, V. Khokhlova, and O. A. Sapozhnikov, “High resolution mapping of nonlinear MHz ultrasonic fields using a scanned scatterer,” in IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium (Honolulu, Hawaii2003), pp. 982985.
22.M. E. Schafer, J. Gessert, and W. Moore, “Development of a high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) hydrophone system,” in Fifth International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound, edited by G. T. Clement, N. J. McDonald, and K. Hynynen (American Institute of Physics, New York, 2005), pp. 609613.


Image of FIG. 1.

Click to view

FIG. 1.

(Color online) Illustration of the experiment for the calculation and measurement of acoustic scatter. The inset is a photograph of the intact and fractured stone models (marks on the scale are millimeters).

Image of FIG. 2.

Click to view

FIG. 2.

(Color online) Acoustic scatter from (a) calculation and (b) measurement. The vertical line at roughly separates the segments of reflection of the shock wave and resonant scattering caused by reverberation. Segments of reflection (left of the vertical line) were truncated and segments of reverberation (right of the vertical line) were retained for analysis in the frequency domain. Since the PVDF receiver was not calibrated, the amplitude of measured signals are presented in volts.

Image of FIG. 3.

Click to view

FIG. 3.

(Color online) The ratio of energies between fractured and intact stones, , in frequency bands for signals from calculation and measurement. Both calculation and measurement show increased energy in the frequency band between 0.5 and , which indicates that the intact and fractured stone models can be distinguished.

Image of FIG. 4.

Click to view

FIG. 4.

(Color online) High-speed photography of the intact stone model subjected to a single shock wave and the corresponding measured acoustic scatter wave form. Each photograph is and labeled with a time relative to , when the shock wave arrived at the stone. The bottom right photograph illustrates with black pointers the axes of the shock wave (bottom) and the receiver (right). Below the photographs is the measured wave form, where the propagation time between the stone and the receiver has been subtracted. The period of acoustic scatter used for analysis is between times 0 and . Bubble collapse and rebound events generally happen much later, at about 250 and here, and do not influence the period of resonant scatter.


Generic image for table

Click to view


Elastic properties used in calculation ( and are the Lamé constants)



The following multimedia file is available:

Results from the linear elastic model that was used in the first step of calculation. Acoustic scatter comprises reflection and reverberation, which are most easily observed to the left of the stone models and along their axes . This is a file of type “mov”. [URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2401266.1]


Article metrics loading...



There is currently little feedback as to whether kidney stones have fractured during shock wave lithotripsy. Resonantscattering of the lithotripter shock wave was used here to differentiate intact and fractured stone models in water. Scattering, including reflection and radiation due to reverberation from within the stone, was calculated numerically with linear elasticity theory and agreed well with measurements made with a focused receiver. Identification of fracture was possible through frequency analysis, where scatter from fractured stones was characterized by higher energy in distinct bands. High-speed photography concurrent with measurement indicated the effect was not due to cavitation.


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: The use of resonant scattering to identify stone fracture in shock wave lithotripsy