<i>In Vitro</i> Comparison of a Novel Single Probe Dual-Energy Lithotripter to Current Devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The LithoClast Trilogy is a novel single probe, dual-energy lithotripter with ultrasonic (US) vibration and electromagnetic impact forces. ShockPulse and LithoClast Select are existing lithotripters that also use a combination of US and mechanical impact energies. We compared the efficacy and tip motion of these devices in an in vitro setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Begostones, in the ratio 15:3, were used in all trials. Test groups were Trilogy, ShockPulse, Select ultrasound (US) only, and Select ultrasound with pneumatic (USP). For clearance testing, a single investigator facile with each lithotripter fragmented 10 stones per device. For drill testing, a hands-free apparatus with a submerged balance was used to apply 1 or 2 lbs of pressure on a stone in contact with the device tip. High-speed photography was used to assess Trilogy and ShockPulse's probe tip motion. RESULTS: Select-USP was slowest and Trilogy fastest on clearance testing (p < 0.01). On 1 lbs drill testing, Select-US was slowest (p = 0.001). At 2 lbs, ShockPulse was faster than Select US (p = 0.027), but did not significantly outpace Trilogy nor Select-USP. At either weight, there was no significant difference between Trilogy and ShockPulse. During its US function, Trilogy's maximum downward tip displacement was 0.041 mm relative to 0.0025 mm with ShockPulse. Trilogy had 0.25 mm of maximum downward displacement during its impactor function while ShockPulse had 0.01 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Single probe dual-energy devices, such as Trilogy and ShockPulse, represent the next generation of lithotripters. Trilogy more efficiently cleared stone than currently available devices, which could be explained by its larger probe diameter and greater downward tip displacement during both US and impactor functions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".