Shockwave Medicine. Группа авторов

We can usually tell the future by examining the past; over the past 3 decades, the history of medical SWT has revealed that its safety and efficacy in each area of its utility has encouraged further research for its expansion, while remaining intransigent to becoming demoded. There is growing evidence that SWT is influencing the activation and differentiation of endogenous stem cells, and is stimulating more research in this area. Among such investigations are: the utility of the evolution FlashWaveTM technology for musculogenesis via endogenous skeletal muscle stem cell activation and differentiation, presently being investigated by Vincent et al. [71, 72] to determine the efficacy for skeletal muscle regeneration in the aging population (sarcopenia/dynapenia), and to improved skeletal muscle resilience in the athletic population. Holfeld et al. [65] are presently investigating intracorporeal SWT on the heart (Fig. 7a, b) ushering in an interesting era in SW medicine.

In urology where SW were first utilized (ESWL) as a destructive force, SWT is now utilized as a regenerative and restorative modality redefining andrology, addressing the issue of erectile dysfunction and is showing very promising results [53–59]. Other investigations include the utility of SWT in dystonia and spasticity [135–140], diabetic neuropathy [141, 142], knee osteoarthritis [143–145], low back pain syndromes [146], uterine fibroids [147], and possible intervention in Langerhans islet beta-cell regeneration in type-1 diabetes mellitus [148], among other emerging indications. The potential clinical utility of SWT is vast and more vigorous research, clinical exploration and collaboration is required to provide firm support for its use and to receive the recognition and funding from both the public and private healthcare sectors.

Fig. 7. a Intracorporeal shockwave (SW) treatment of the heart: Holfeld et al. [64], Dept. of Cardiac Surgery, Innsbruck Medical University, Austria. b Specialised intracorporeal SW (electrohydraulic) applicator designed for open heart interventions.

      Conclusion

      With over 3 decades of utility since its inception into medicine, SWT has continued to extend its utility over multiple disciplines and has continued to be widely investigated by researchers globally. No two devices will produce the exact same stimulus, and this fact will have an influence and impact on clinical efficacy and outcomes. Therefore, the selection of appropriate technology, and the employment of effective assessment and application techniques is a pertinent fact for clinical success. The safety, noninvasive nature, and systemic neutrality of SWT makes it a unique interventional modality, and the expansion of its utility may provide a more sanative approach for the management of multiple pathologies. The increased utility of SWT has the potential to improve the quality of life and productivity across the lifespan, while reducing the burdens of global healthcare costs.

      References

1Lamport H, Newman HF, Eichhorn RD: Fragmentation of biliary calculi by ultrasound. Fed Probat 1950;9:73–74.

      2Coats EC: The application of ultrasonic energy to urinary and biliary calculi. J Urol 1956;75:865–874.

3Mulvaney WP: Attempted disintegration of calculi by ultrasonic vibrations. J Urol 1953;70:704–707.

4Wess O: Physics and technique of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL); in Talai J, Tieselius HG, Albala DM, Ye Z (eds): Urolithiasis. Basic Science and Clinical Practice. London, Springer Verlag, 2012, pp 301–311.

5Loske AM: Brief historical background; in Graham RA, Davidson L, Horie Y (eds): Medical and Biomedical Applications of Shock Waves. Springer International Publishing AG, Switzerland, 2017, pp 7–8.

      6Herr HW: “Crushing the stone:” a brief history of lithotripsy, the first minimally invasive surgery. BJU Int 2008;102:432–435.

7Thiel M: Application of shock waves in medicine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;387:18–21.

8Ueberle F: Shock wave technology; in Siebert W, Buch M (eds): Extracorporeal shock waves in orthopaedics. Berlin, Springer, 1997, pp 59–87.

      9Karpman RR, Magee FP, Gruen TW, Mobley T: The lithotriptor and its potential use in the revision of total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Rev 1987;16:81–85.

10Weinstein JN, Oster DM, Park JB, Park SH, Loening S: The effect of the extracorporeal shock wave lithotriptor on the bone-cement interface in dogs. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;235:261–267.

11May TC, Krause WR, Preslar AJ, Smith MJ, Beaudoin AJ, Cardea JA: Use of high-energy shock waves for bone cement removal. J Arthroplasty 1990;5:19–27.

12Valchanou VD, Michailov P: High energy shock waves in the treatment of delayed and nonunion of fractures. Int Orthop 1991;15:181–184.

13Schaden W, Fischer A, Sailler A: Extracorporeal shock wave therapy of nonunion or delayed osseous union. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;387:90–94.

      14Alves EM, Angrisani AT, Santiago MB: The use of extracorporeal shock waves in the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a systematic review. Clin Rheumatol 2009;28:1247–1251.

      15Cacchio A, Giordano L, Colafarina O, Rompe JD, Tavernese E, Ioppolo F, Flamini S, Spacca G, Santilli V: Extracorporeal shock-wave therapy compared with surgery for hypertrophic long-bone nonunions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009;91:2589–2597.

      16Furia JP, Juliano PJ, Wade AM, Schaden W, Mittermayr R: Shock wave therapy compared with intramedullary screw fixation for nonunion of proximal fifth metatarsal metaphyseal-diaphyseal fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010;92:846–854.

      17Furia JP, Rompe JD, Cacchio A, Maffulli N: Shock wave therapy as a treatment of nonunions, avascular necrosis, and delayed healing of stress fractures. Foot Ankle Clin 2010;15:651–662.

      18d’Agostino C, Romeo P, Amelio E, Sansone V: Effectiveness of ESWT in the treatment of Kienböck’s disease. Ultrasound Med Biol 2011;37:1452–1456.

      19Vulpiani MC, Vetrano M, Trischitta