Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ESWT2
ESWT2
We'll also discuss some of the differences between the various forms
of shockwave therapy on the market today:
Are there different forms of ESWT?
What's the difference between the different forms of ESWT?
Which is the best version of shockwave therapy?
What form of shockwave therapy do you use?
How do I know which version of ESWT is being offered at a facility?
Where can I find the best, most up-to-date form of ESWT available?
-------------------------------------
Stress Fractures
Avascular Necrosis (A dead portion of bone)
Slow-healing bone (Delayed unions)
Non-healing bone (Non-unions)
There are also urological conditions that respond to ESWT,
such as Peyronie's Disease.
Research presented at the 2005 International Conference on ESWT in Vienna and the 2006
International Conference in Rio de Janeiro demonstrated that ESWT is also being studied for
use for a wide variety of other conditions as disparate as skin ulcers and other chronic
dermatological lesions, infections, angina, arthritis, reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), and
certain neurological conditions.
Shock Wave Therapy is generally considered when the following criteria are met:
ESWT is not typically used in the presence of bone tumours, certain metabolic bone
conditions, and certain nerve or circulation disorders. ESWT isn't typically used in pregnant
patients and locations of an open growth plate, (where the bone is still growing). It's not
currently used in areas where an infection is present, (though there is some early research
suggesting ESWT may actually help with infection). It also shouldn't be used in conditions or
locations where gas or air is present in the body, (rare in the locations where ESWT is
typically used)--or for other conditions as determined by your doctor.
The answer to this question depends upon which study you read, what methods were used in
the study, how "success" is measured in the study, the patients selected to be included in the
study, the condition being treated, and the machine being used.
While there are some studies (usually quoted by an insurance company trying to find a way to
justify not paying for ESWT treatment) that suggest that shockwave hasn't been proven to be
effective, the vast majority of recent studies suggest that shockwave is highly effective. For
example, over 70 studies were presented at the 2006 international shockwave seminar in
Brazil, and over 80 were presented the year before in Vienna--and this doesn't even include
the numerous published findings in the medical literature.
We find that our results with the highly accurate piezoelectric technology, are at least this
successful. The most important factor in getting a good result with ESWT appears to be in
selecting appropriate patients most likely to benefit from this technology. However, we can't
predict which patients will respond successfully to ESWT and which ones won't.
We find that many patients get an initial degree of improvement almost immediately following
treatment. This effect is usually (but not always) temporary, and is associated with an
anesthesia effect from the hyperstimulation of the tissue from the ESWT.
It takes several days for injuries to begin to heal, and many patients see an improvement
before the end of the second week. Depending upon your diagnosis, the healing process may
take several weeks or even months to be completed, but pain relief often precedes the
completion of the healing process.
The basic technology involved with extracorporeal shockwave technology has been used for
decades now on quite literally millions of people. The technology has been used most
extensively in Europe, particularly the German-speaking countries, where this technology
originates. In all its use, ESWT of the musculoskeletal system has been found to have
virtually no serious side-effects. In fact, even mild side effects like tingling, aching, redness,
or bruising are relatively rare, modest and short-lived.
Further, effects like these appear to be more common with higher energy treatments,
particularly those from earlier generations of ESWT technology than that which we use. We'll
discuss more about the different ESWT technologies below.
Simply put, extracorporeal shockwaves stimulate certain components within the body so the
body is able to heal. And ESWT is able to accomplish this even in chronic cases, when the
body has demonstrated a previous unwillingness or inability to do so by itself.
In addition to stimulating the healing process, ESWT seems to have a direct effect on nerves,
diminishing pain.
What makes ESWT unique is that it is one of the very few technologies in any field of
medicine that seems to work best when an injury reaches the chronic, non-healing state.
ESWT appears to be able to jump start the healing process in chronic, non-healing injuries
and move them back into the acute phase of healing.
While investigations are still being conducted to more fully understand the
precise mechanism behind ESWT's effects on injured tissues, the picture is
becoming much clearer.
These
microjets
also create a
lot of force
that also
breaks down
pathological
deposits of
calcification
in the soft
tissues
through
direct,
mechanical
means.
While ESWT is used on a wide variety of body tissues and medical condition
conditions can you treat with ESWT? section above), the effects of shockwa
documented in areas of changes in tissue density, such as where tendon att
(enthesiopathies) and where bone attaches to ligaments (desmopathies).
is very effective for painful connective tissue pain in such locations as the fo
elbow, and shoulder.
While there are numerous shockwave machines on the market today, they ar
one of four basic shockwave (or shockwave-like) technologies.
they were introduced in Canada, they are:
These technologies differ in the manner in which the shockwaves are produ
the shockwave to be controlled and focused, the depth to which the shockw
penetrate, the intensity of the shockwave being produced, the sorts of condi
able to treat, and whether they require anesthesia.
The third technology on the list above, radial therapy, is actually quite differe
other three technologies in several regards and is usually not considered tru
shockwave therapy--but more of a pressure wave therapy.
We'll try to differentiate all this for you. First let's go through the three true f
electrohydraulic, electromagnetic, and piezoelectric.
Each of these three technologies is similar in that the shockwaves and force
machines is translated past the skin and superficial tissues without effect, a
focused at the desired tissue depth.
In comparison, RSWT waves travel at speeds of approximately 10 meters per second, a small
fraction of true shockwave. This speed does not break the sound barrier, and hence, no
actual shockwave is produced.
Indeed, the very wave form produced by radial technology differs from true shockwave
rather noticeably. True focused shockwaves are very short and very intense; radial pressure
waves are slower, less intense, elongated, and more sinusoidal in appearance.
Because no actual shockwave is produced with RSWT, and because the waveform is so
different, you can better see why RSWT is not considered a shockwave technology. It is
more accurately described as a pressure wave technology, and most researchers now use
this term to describe this technology. However, some facilities with these machines
continue to inaccurately label their technology as shockwave therapy.
As you might imagine intuitively, being able to aim shockwaves directly on the desired
tissues and only the desired tissues is generally considered to be superior to not being able
to direct the shockwaves to the specific injured tissues.
Radial pressure waves are applied to the skin only, and must dissipate to the tissues from
there. They are therefore not able to be aimed to different tissue depths. Deeper tissue
injuries are therefore more difficult to treat with radial shockwave.
Focus Area:
Not only does this mean a greater concentration of therapeutic energy on the specific injured
tissues, it also means less trauma to the surrounding uninjured tissues.
As alluded to above, the piezoelectric technology we use has, by far, the tightest focus area
of any competing technology in the world.
For instance, even at maximum energy level, the focus area for the Piezoson 100, (the
machine we use), is 1.3mm x 1.3mm x 4.2mm. (This equates roughly to 1/20th of an inch x
1/20th of an inch x 1/6th of an inch.)
In comparison with other machines in North America, the focus area for the Ossatron is
8.7mm x 8.7mm x 67.6mm; the focus area for the Sonocur is 4.8mm 4.8mm x 48.3mm and for
the Epos it's 2.9mm x 2.9mm x 22.0mm. (Radial pressure waves cannot be focused at all.)
(Source for these statistics, the German site on physical parameters of extracorporeal shock wave therapy
technologies: http://stosswellentherapie.org/fach/vergl.html)
As these statistics make clear, the piezoelectric technology is the most accurate ESWT
technology on the market. Treatment is more precisely directed at injured tissues and the
least traumatic to uninjured tissues surrounding the site being treated.
Energy Level:
Another important differentiating characteristic is how high an energy output the machine
produces. In fact, this characteristic is commonly used in marketing various machines.
For instance, you'll see many websites touting the benefits of their machine being either
"high energy" or "low energy". Facilities with "high energy" machines claim, for example,
that their technology is superior because only one treatment is typically required and the
technology has been around longer. Facilities with "low energy" machines advertise that it
doesn't require anesthesia and it's cheaper.
While there is some truth to each of these claims, the larger question is frequently not
mentioned. That is to say, the question that should be asked is what is better at actually
treating a particular condition? High energy or low energy?
Before we can answer this question, you should know that the energy level of a machine is
actually a fairly complicated subject and it deserves some discussion.
For instance, you'd think that the energy produced by a machine would be a pretty clear-cut
characteristic. But there are several different--and confusing--ways to measure energy. For
example, you could consider the amount or type of energy produced by the machine, the
amount or type of energy delivered into the body, the amount or type of energy delivered into
the focus area, the amount or type of energy delivered to a central point inside the focus
area, or the amount or type of energy present at a certain radius from that central focus
point.
As you might expect, so many variables make it rather confusing to both patients and
physicians. After all, even doctors aren't sure what type of energy is most important when
judging which technology is a better in which to invest.
For the purposes of this discussion, we'll concentrate on the most common standardized
measurement of energy in the field, something called the "energy flux density", expressed in
millijo
ules
per
millime
ter
(mJ/m
m2)..
Energy
flux
densit
y can
be
define
d as
the
amoun
t or
conce
ntratio
n of
energy
in the
focus
area.
In
other
words,
this is
the
amoun
t of
therap
eutic
energy
being
deliver
ed to
the
injured
tissue.
The
physic
s of
the
other
measu
res of
energy
are
interes
ting,
but we
feel
this is
the
charac
teristic
in which most patients and physicians are interested.
Now even when we've defined what we mean by an energy level and defined the unit of
measurement, you should know that different authors use different cut-off measurements to
define "high energy" and "low energy". One author's "high energy" setting may only qualify
as a "low energy" setting in another author's opinion. So the terms "high energy" and "low
energy" are rather imprecise and arbitrary. (This demonstrates why the marketing of "high
energy" and "low energy" machines is somewhat dubious.)
For the purposes of this discussion, we'll define low energy here as less than 0.27 mJ/mm 2 ,
medium energy as 0.27 mJ/mm2 to 0.59 mJ/mm2 , and high energy as anything over
0.60 mJ/mm2. These are frequently-used cut-off points, but do keep in mind that other
practitioners, researchers, manufacturers, and websites may use different values.
So now that we've defined what energy is, what's considered high, medium, or low energy,
let's get back to the question of what energy settings are better to treat a specific injury.
The answer that seems to becoming more clear in research is that both high energy settings
and low energy settings have their indications.
For instance, certain tissues (like bone) appear to respond better to higher energy settings.
Conditions like avascular necrosis and delayed unions and pathological calcifications are
examples of conditions that are typically thought of as being more responsive to higher
intensity settings. In addition, the original medical application for shockwaves, the treatment
of kidney stones, too, seem to be most effective with higher energy settings.
However, other tissues (like tendons and other more sensitive structures) typically require
lower energy settings, as research indicates that these they may be damaged by higher-
intensity settings.
Complicating matters further, what does a patient do when both hard and soft tissues need
to be treated for a single injury, as is often the case? For example, what if a patient has both
a bone spur and a soft tissue injury like fasciitis or tendonitis? Is it better to go with a so-
called "high energy" machine or a "low energy" machine?
The good news is that it doesn't have to be an either-or proposition. The beauty of the
piezoelectric ESWT technology we use is that it covers the energy spectra employed by the
other technologies.
For instance, piezoelectric ESWT can be applied in energy levels as low as .05 mJ/mm 2--
obviously well into the lowest levels of energy--and it can be raised as high as 1.48 mJ/mm2--
an energy level well above even the classic "high energy" machines.
In other words, in terms of the amount of energy applied in the focus area, (the so-called
"energy flux density"), piezoelectric technology can be delivered in energy doses as low as
virtually any other competing technology and as high or higher than virtually any other
technology.
Further, piezoelectric technology can be readily adjusted to any energy level, depending
upon the specific condition and indication of each individual case. And as mentioned above,
the energy can be precisely focused to the specific depth required.
Our patients don't have to compromise for a single energy range or a specific tissue type.
And because the machine we use is so precise, we can use high energy settings in areas
very close to the most sensitive tissue
structures. This allows the piezoelectric
technology noticeable advantages to
machines with much less precise focus
areas.
Anesthesia Requirements:
Until recently, this piezoelectric shockwave technology had been only available in Europe.
So when it recently became approved for use in Canada, we were quick to choose this
technology. We are pleased to say that our facility was the first facility using this newest
form of ESWT technology in Canada. And to the best of our knowledge, we are still the
only facility using this technology in all of western Canada.
This newest form of ESWT technology is still unavailable in the United States--though the
other, older forms of ESWT do exist in the United States.
Many facilities don't go into much detail about the different versions of ESWT technology.
Perhaps they may feel it doesn't matter to the patient or that the information is too technical
for most patients. But if you're having significant pain and are searching for answers, if
you're curious which machine may be most applicable to your condition, we feel this is the
sort of information that we find a lot of patients seek. If the facility you're considering isn't
clear about what version of ESWT technology they're using and you wish to know, you
should ask.
Where can I get the best, most up-to-date form of focused ESWT?
At present, the only site we know of in British Columbia or in Western Canada offering
Piezoson 100 ESWT is at our facility in Surrey, British Columbia near Vancouver. While this
technology has been around for many years in Europe and in Canada for nearly two years,
it is not yet available in the United States or in many other countries around the world.
For this reason, we welcome patients from any area who are seeking this newest of ESWT
technology. Overnight or longer stays can be arranged at some of the
recommended hotels near our facility.
Shockwave Therapy - BC
Suite 102
10190 - 152A Street
Surrey, British Columbia
V3R 1J7 Canada
T: 604-589-5234
For more maps and directions to our location, please follow the following link.
___________________
Website Directory
What We Offer
General Information About ESWT
How We're Different
Information About Your Visit
About Us
About Dr. Schumacher
Answers To Financial Questions
Location, Directions and Maps
Hotels Near Our Facility
Traveler's Information
Links
Contact Us
Return Home
___________________