SpringerLink
Log in

Application of ultrasound imaging in the treatment of urinary tract stones

  • Special Feature: Review Article
  • Recent development of diagnostics and therapeutics ultrasound for urological disease
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Ultrasonics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urinary tract stones are a common clinical condition that affect millions of individuals worldwide. The management of these stones has evolved significantly over the past 70 years, and ultrasound imaging has emerged as a valuable tool for diagnosis, treatment planning, and follow-up. This review aims to provide an overview of the application of ultrasound imaging in the treatment of urinary tract stones, highlighting its advantages, limitations, and current advancements in the field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Source: Reproduced from [32]

Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Source: Reproduced from [84]

Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

References

  1. Alelign T, Petros B. Kidney stone disease: an update on current concepts. Adv Urol. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3068365.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Sakamoto S, Miyazawa K, Yasui T, et al. Chronological changes in the epidemiological characteristics of upper urinary tract urolithiasis in Japan. Int J Urol. 2018;25:373–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Uribarri J, Oh MS, Carroll HJ. The first kidney stone. Ann Intern Med. 1989;111:1006–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kluner C, Hein PA, Gralla O, et al. Does ultra-low-dose CT with a radiation dose equivalent to that of KUB suffice to detect renal and ureteral calculi? J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;30:44–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Caoili EM, Cohan RH, Korobkin M, et al. Urinary tract abnormalities: initial experience with multi-detector row CT urography. Radiology. 2002;222:353–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Van Der Molen AJ, Cowan NC, Mueller-Lisse UG, et al. CT urography: definition, indications and techniques. A guideline for clinical practice. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:4–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Niemann T, Kollmann T, Bongartz G. Diagnostic performance of low-dose CT for the detection of urolithiasis: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:396–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zilberman DE, Tsivian M, Lipkin ME, et al. Low dose computerized tomography for detection of urolithiasis-its effectiveness in the setting of the urology clinic. J Urol. 2011;185:910–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fulgham PF, Assimos DG, Pearle MS, et al. Clinical effectiveness protocols for imaging in the management of ureteral calculous disease: AUA technology assessment. J Urol. 2013;189:1203–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bhanot R, Hameed ZBM, Shah M, et al. ALARA in Urology: Steps to minimise radiation exposure during all parts of the endourological journey. Curr Urol Rep. 2022;23:255–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Tasian GE, Copelovitch L, et al. Evaluation and medical management of kidney stones in children. J Urol. 2014;192:1329–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schlegel JU, Diggdon P, Cuellar J. The use of ultrasound for localizing renal calculi. J Urol. 1961;86:367–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cook JH III, Lytton S. Intraoperative localization of renal calculi during nephrolithotomy by ultrasound scanning. J Urol. 1977;117:543–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, et al. EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69:475–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, et al. Surgical management of stones: American urological association/Endourological society guideline. PART I J Urol. 2016;196:1153–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Smith A, Averch TD, Shahrour K, et al. A nephrolithometric nomogram to predict treatment success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol. 2013;190:149–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Mansour O, et al. A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high-resolution noncontrast computed tomography. Eur Urol. 2007;51:1693–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ferrandino MN, Bagrodia A, Pierre SA, et al. Radiation exposure in the acute and short-term management of urolithiasis at 2 academic centers. J Urol. 2009;181:668–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ripolles T, Agramunt M, Errando J, et al. Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography vs unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study in 66 patients. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:129–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Smith-Bindman R, Aubin C, Bailitz J, et al. Ultrasonography versus computed tomography for suspected nephrolithiasis. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1100–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stothers L, Lee LM. Renal colic in pregnancy. J Urol. 1992;148:1383–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Patel SJ, Reede DL, Katz DS, et al. Imaging the pregnant patient for nonobstetric conditions: algorithms and radiation dose considerations. Radiographics. 2007;27:1705–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cheung KL, Lafayette RA. Renal physiology of pregnancy. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2013;20:209–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. King WE 3rd, Kimme-Smith C, Winter J. Renal stone shadowing: an investigation of contributing factors. Radiology. 1985;154:191–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wood BG, Urban MW. Detecting kidney stones using twinkling artifacts: survey of kidney stones with varying composition and size. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2020;46:155–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rahmouni A, Bargoin R, Herment A, et al. Color Doppler twinkling artifact in hyperechoic regions. Radiology. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.199.1.8633158.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Winkel RR, Kalhauge A, Fredfeldt KE. The usefulness of ultrasound color Doppler twinkling artefact for detecting urolithiasis compared with low dose nonenhanced computerized tomography. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2012;38:1180–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Abdel-Gawad M, Kadasne RD, Elsobky E, et al. A prospective comparative study of color Doppler ultrasound with twinkling and noncontrast computerized tomography for the evaluation of acute renal colic. J Urol. 2016;196:757–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gliga ML, Chirila CN, Podeanu DM, et al. Twinkle, twinkle little stone: an artifact improves the ultrasound performance! Med Ultrason. 2017;19:272–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Masch WR, Cohan RH, Ellis JH, et al. Clinical effectiveness of prospectively reported sonographic twinkling artifact for the diagnosis of renal calculus in patients without known urolithiasis. Am J Roentgenol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.14998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sternberg KM, Eisner B, Larson T, et al. Ultrasonography significantly overestimates stone size when compared to; ow-dose, noncontrast computed tomography. Urology. 2016;95:67–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ganesan V, De S, Greene D, et al. Accuracy of ultrasonography for renal stone detection and size determination: is it good enough for management decisions? BJU Int. 2017;119:464–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ray AA, Ghiculete D, Pace KT, et al. Limitations to ultrasound in the detection and measurement of urinary tract calculi. Urology. 2010;76:295–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dunmire B, Lee FC, Hsi RS, et al. Tools to improve the accuracy of kidney stone sizing with ultrasound. J Endourol. 2015;29:147–52.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Dunmire B, Harper JD, Cunitz BW, et al. Use of the acoustic shadow width to determine kidney stone size with ultrasound. J Urol. 2016;195:171–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Dai JC, Dunmire B, Sternberg KM, et al. Retrospective comparison of measured stone size and posterior acoustic shadow width in clinical ultrasound images. World J Urol. 2018;36:727–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ellenbogen PH, Scheible FW, Talner LB, et al. Sensitivity of gray scale ultrasound in detecting urinary tract obstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1978;130:731–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Wong C, Teitge B, Ross M, et al. The accuracy and prognostic value of point-of-care ultrasound for nephrolithiasis in the emergency department: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med. 2018;25:684–498.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hamamoto S, Okada S, Inoue T, et al. Prospective evaluation and classification of endoscopic findings for ureteral calculi. Sci Rep. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-699158-w.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, Kozacioglu Zm, et al. Outcomes of ureteroscopy for the management of impacted ureteral calculi with different localizations. Urology. 2012;80:811–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Yamashita S, Inoue T, Kohjimoto Y, et al. Comprehensive endoscopic management of impacted ureteral stones: literature review and expert opinions. Int J Urol. 2022;29:799–806.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Legemate JD, Wijnstok NJ, Matsuda T, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of ureteroscopic treatment in 2650 patients with impacted ureteral stones. World J Urol. 2017;35:1497.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Taguchi K, Hamamoto S, Osaga S, et al. Comparison of antegrade and retrograde ureterolithotripsy for proximal ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trans Adnrol Urol. 2021;10:1179–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. De Sio M, Autorino R, Quarto G, et al. Modified supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones treatable with a single percutaneous access: a prospective randomized trial. Eur Urol. 2008;54:196–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Yuan D, Liu Y, Rao H, et al. Supine versus prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for kidney calculi: a meta-analysis. J Endourol. 2016;30:754–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Hamamoto S, Okada S, Inoue T, et al. Comparison of the safety and efficacy between the prone split-leg and Galdakao-modified supine Valdivia positions during endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery: a multi-institutional analysis. Int J Urol. 2021;28:1129–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Munver R, Delvecchio FC, Newman GE, et al. Critical analysis of supracostal access for percutaneous renal surgery. J Urol. 2001;166:1242–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Amaresh M, Hegde P, Chawla A, et al. Safety and efficacy of superior calyceal access versus inferior calyceal access for pelvic and/or lower calyceal renal calculi—a prospective observational comparative study. World J Urol. 2021;39:2155–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R, et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol. 2005;173:2005–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Drake T, Grivas N, Dabestani S, et al. What are the benefits and harms of ureteroscopy compared with shock-wave lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral stones? A systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72:772–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Sorensen MD, Bailey MR, Shah AR, et al. Quantitative assessment of shockwave lithotripsy accuracy and the effect of respiratory motion. J Endourol. 2012;26:1070–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Chen CJ, Hsu HC, Chung WS, Yu HJ. Clinical experience with ultrasound-based real-time tracking lithotripsy in the single renal stone treatment. J Endourol. 2009;23:1811–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Isogai M, Hamamoto S, Kawase K, et al. Efficacy of ultrasound monitoring during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a multi-institutional propensity score-matched study. Int J Urol. 2022;29:1054–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Besien JV, Uvin P, Hermie I, et al. Ultrasonography is not inferior to fluoroscopy to guide extracorporeal shock waves during treatment of renal and upper ureteric calculi: a randomized prospective study. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:7802672.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Drach GW, Dretler S, Fair W. Report of the United States cooperative study of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 1986;35:1127–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sumino Y, Mimata H, Tasaki Y, et al. Predictors of lower pole renal stone clearance after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 2002;168:1344–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Elbahnasy AM, Clayman RV, Shalhav AL, et al. Lower pole calyceal stone clearance after SWL, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and flexible URS; impact of radiographic spatial anatomy. J Endourol. 1998;12:113–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Sampaio FJ, Aragao AH. Inferior pole collecting system anatomy; its probable role in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 1992;147:322–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Shah A, Owen N, Lu W, et al. Novel ultrasound method to reposition kidney stones. Urol Res. 2010;38:491–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Harper JD, Cunitz BW, Dunmire B, et al. First in human clinical trial of ultrasonic propulsion of kidney stones. J Urol. 2016;195:956–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. May PC, Bailey MR, Harper JD. Ultrasonic propulsion of kidney stones. Curr Opin Urol. 2016;26:264–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Harper JD, Sorensen MD, Cunitz BW, et al. Focused ultrasound to expel calculi from the kidney: safety and efficacy of a clinical prototype device. J Urol. 2013;190:1090–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Candau C, Saussine C, Lang H, et al. Natural history of residual renal stone fragments after ESWL. Eur Urol. 2000;37:18–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Sahin C, Tuncer M, Yazici O, et al. Do the residual fragments after shock wave lithotripsy affect the quality of life? Urology. 2014;84:549–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Chew BH, Brotherhood HL, Sur RL, et al. Natural history, complications and re-intervention rates of asymptomatic residual stone fragments after ureteroscopy: a report from the EDGE Research Consortium. J Urol. 2016;195:982–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Maxwell AD, Cunitz BW, Kreider W, et al. Fragmentation of urinary calculi in vitro by burst wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 2015;193:338–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Dai JC, Bailey MR, Sorensen MD, et al. Innovations in ultrasound technology in the management of kidney stones. Urol Clin North Am. 2019;46:273–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Harper JD, Lingeman JE, Sweet RM, et al. Fragmentation of stones by burst wave lithotripsy in the first 19 humans. J Urol. 2022;207:1067–76.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Hall MK, Thiel J, Dunmire B, et al. First series using ultrasonic propulsion and burst wave lithotripsy to treat ureteral stones. J Urol. 2022;208:1075–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Chung DY, Kang DH, Cho KS, et al. Comparison of stone-free rates following shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2019;14: e0211316.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Seitz C, Desai M, Häcker A, et al. Incidence, prevention, and management of complications following percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy. Eur Urol. 2012;61:146–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. El-Nahas AR, Shokeir AA, El-Assmy AM, et al. Post-percutaneous nephrolithotomy extensive hemorrhage: a study of risk factors. J Urol. 2007;177:576–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Wickham JE, Kellett MJ. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Br J Urol. 1981;53:297–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Desai M, Ridhorkar V, Patel S, et al. Pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy: assessing impact of technical innovations on safety and efficacy. J Endourol. 1999;13:359–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Agarwal M, Agrawal MS, Jaiswal A, et al. Safety and efficacy of ultrasonography as an adjunct to fluoroscopy for renal access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). BJU Int. 2011;108:1346–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Corrales M, Doizi S, Barghouthy Y, et al. Ultrasound or fluoroscopy for percutaneous nephrolithotomy access, is there really a difference? A review of literature. J Endourol. 2021;35:241–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Usawachintachit M, Masic S, Allen IE, et al. Adopting ultrasound guidance for prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy: evaluating the learning curve for the experienced surgeon. J Endourol. 2016;30:856–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. de la Rosette JJ, Laguna MP, Rassweiler et al. Training in percutaneous nephrolithotomy—a critical review. Eur Urol. 2008;54:994.

  79. Tzeng BC, Wang CJ, Huang SW, et al. Doppler ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized study. Urology. 2011;78:535–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Lu MH, Pu XY, Gao X, et al. A comparative study of clinical value of single B-mode ultrasound guidance and B-mode combined with color doppler ultrasound guidance in mini-invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy to decrease hemorrhagic complications. Urology. 2010;76:815–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Meola M, Ibeas J, Lasalle G, et al. Basics for performing a high-quality color Doppler sonography of the vascular access. J Vasc Access. 2021;22:18–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Inoue T, Kinoshita H, Okada S, et al. Wideband Doppler ultrasound-guided mini-endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery as an effective and safe procedure for management of large renal stones: a preliminary report. Urology. 2016;95:60–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Miyagawa T, Ishikawa S, Kimura T, et al. Real-time virtual sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int J Urol. 2010;10:855–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Haber GP, Colombo JR, Remer E, et al. Synchronized real-time ultrasonography and three-dimensional computed tomography scan navigation during percutaneous renal cryoablation in a porcine model. J Endourol. 2010;24:333–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Hamamoto S, Unno R, Taguchi K, et al. A new navigation system of renal puncture for endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery: real-time virtual sonography-guided renal access. Urology. 2017;109:44–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Rule AD, Lieske JC, Li X, et al. The ROKS nomogram for predicting a second symptomatic stone episode. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2014;25:2878–86.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. D’Costa MR, Haley WE, Mara KC, et al. Symptomatic and radiographic manifestations of kidney stone recurrence and their prediction by risk factors: a prospective cohort study. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;30:1251–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Tzelves L, Geraghty R, Lombardo R, et al. Duration of follow-up and timing of discharge from imaging follow-up, in adult patients with urolithiasis after surgical or medical intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Guideline Panel on Urolithiasis. Eur Urol Focus. 2023;9:188–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Poletti PA, Platon A, Rutschmann OT, et al. Low-dose versus standard-dose CT protocol in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:927–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Moore CL, Carpenter CR, Heilbrun ME, et al. Imaging in suspected renal colic: systematic review of the literature and multispecialty consensus. J Urol. 2019;202:475–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Mitterberger M, **gera GM, Pallwein L, et al. Plain abdominal radiography with transabdominal native tissue harmonic imaging ultrasonography vs unenhanced computed tomography in renal colic. BJU Int. 2007;100:887–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Fahmy NM, Elkoushy MA, Andonian S. Effective radiation exposure in evaluation and follow-up of patients with urolithiasis. Urology. 2012;79:43–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nephro-Urology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, 467-8601, Japan

    Shuzo Hamamoto, Kazumi Taguchi & Takahiro Yasui

  2. Department of Urology, Hara Genitourinary Hospital, Hyogo, Japan

    Takaaki Inoue

  3. Department of Urology, Gyotoku General Hospital, Chiba, Japan

    Shinsuke Okada

  4. SMART Study Group, Nagoya, Japan

    Shuzo Hamamoto, Takaaki Inoue & Shinsuke Okada

Authors
  1. Shuzo Hamamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Takaaki Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shinsuke Okada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kazumi Taguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Takahiro Yasui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuzo Hamamoto.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for inclusion in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hamamoto, S., Inoue, T., Okada, S. et al. Application of ultrasound imaging in the treatment of urinary tract stones. J Med Ultrasonics (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-023-01343-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-023-01343-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation