OBJECTIVE To assess renal injury in a pig model after treatment with a clinical dose of shock waves using a narrow focal zone (≈ 3 mm) lithotriptor (Modulith SLX, Karl Storz Lithotripsy). MATERIALS AND METHODS The left kidney of anaesthetized female pigs were treated with 2000 or 4000 shock waves (SWs) at 120 SWs/min, or 2000 SWs at 60 SWs/min using the Storz SLX. Measures of renal function (glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow) were collected before and 1 h after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and the kidneys were harvested for histological analysis and morphometric quantitation of haemorrhage in the renal parenchyma with lesion size expressed as a percentage of functional renal volume (FRV). A fibre-optic probe hydrophone was used to determine acoustic output and map the focal width of the lithotriptor. Data for the SLX were compared with data from a previously published study in which pigs of the same age (7–8 weeks) were treated (2000 SWs at 120 or 60 SWs/min) using an unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotriptor. RESULTS Treatment with the SLX produced a highly focused lesion running from cortex to medulla and often spanning the full thickness of the kidney. Unlike the diffuse interstitial haemorrhage observed with the HM3, the SLX lesion bore a blood-filled core of near-complete tissue disruption devoid of histologically recognizable kidney structure. Despite the intensity of tissue destruction at the core of the lesion, measures of lesion size based on macroscopic determination of haemorrhage in the parenchyma were not significantly different from kidneys treated using the HM3 (2000 SWs, 120 SWs/min: SLX, 1.86 ± 0.52% FRV; HM3, 3.93 ± 1.29% FRV). Doubling the SW dose of the SLX from 2000 to 4000 SWs did not significantly increase lesion size. In addition, slowing the firing rate of the SLX to 60 SWs/min did not reduce the size of the lesion (2.16 ± 0.96% FRV) compared with treatment at 120 SWs/min, as was the case with the HM3 (0.42 ± 0.23% FRV vs 3.93 ± 1.29% FRV). Renal function fell significantly below baseline in all treated groups but was similar for both lithotriptors. Focal width of the SLX (≈ 2.6 mm) was about one-third that of the HM3 (≈ 8 mm) while peak pressures were higher (SLX at power level 9: P+ ≈ 90 MPa, P− ≈ −12 MPa; HM3 at 24 kV: P+ ≈ 46 MPa, P−≈−8 MPa). CONCLUSIONS The lesion produced by the SLX (narrow focal width, high acoustic pressure) was a more focused, more intense form of tissue damage than occurs with the HM3. Slowing the SW rate to 60 SWs/min, a strategy shown to be effective in reducing injury with the HM3, was not protective with the SLX. These findings suggest that the focal width and acoustic output of a lithotriptor affect the renal response to SWL. Keywords: shock wave lithotripsy, renal injury, narrow focal zone INTRODUCTION Renal injury is an unfortunate but expected consequence of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). All patients experience at least mild haematuria, some develop subcapsular or perinephric haematomas, and in rare cases excessive bleeding can develop, requiring intervention [1–6]. SWL injury has not been well studied in patients but there is a wealth of information describing the renal response to SWs in experimental animals. The most thorough characterization has been conducted in the pig model where the severity of tissue damage and size of the haemorrhagic lesion are dependent on many factors, including treatment settings for power and shock wave (SW) rate, the sequence of SW delivery, the number of SWs and the size of the kidney [7–10]. This work in assessing treatment variables has helped to estimate the potential for injury in the clinical setting and has revealed treatment strategies that significantly reduce tissue damage [8,9,11–13]. Thus, there is a growing understanding of how treatment settings contribute to injury in SWL. However, little has been done in a systematic way to compare the injuries produced by different lithotriptors. Lithotriptors are not all the same. The SWs of all lithotriptors have similar features, but the acoustic output and dimensions of the focal zone produced by different machines can be very different [14]. Focal width is a critical feature of a lithotriptor and in working terms describes how tightly SW energy is focused in the patient. Focal width is important because it affects the mechanisms at play in stone breakage. Shear stress contributing to stone breakage is enhanced when the focal width is wider than the stone [15,16]. Also, since respiratory motion moves the stone in and out of the focal zone, a lithotriptor with larger focal width has an improved chance of hitting the target [17]. Indeed, patient studies have suggested that focal width can affect outcomes with lower stone-free rates for narrow focal width lithotriptors [18–22]. Focal width has also been implicated in SWL injury, with the suggestion of an increased occurrence of adverse effects with narrow focal width machines [23,24]. The focal widths of current lithotriptors cover a broad range, from ≈ 2.1 mm (Wolf Piezolith P3000) to ≈ 20 mm (LithoGold LG-380). Most machines are reported have a focal width of about 6–10 mm and it is not uncommon to find considerable variance for the values reported for a given machine. For example, reported values of focal width for the unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotriptor (Dornier Medical Systems, Kennesaw, GA, USA) run from ≈ 8 to ≈ 12 mm, the difference being due to how the measurements were conducted [14,25]. Accurate measures require rigorous mapping of the pressure field with a fibre-optic probe hydrophone and this is not an assessment often performed beyond the characterization required for the licensing and approval of a new lithotriptor [26]. The Storz Modulith SLX (Karl Storz Lithotripsy, Atlanta, GA, USA) is an electromagnetic lithotriptor that has gained considerable popularity within the urology community. This machine emerged during the wave of technical development spurred by interest in making SWL an anaesthesia-free procedure. Since discomfort during SWL is due largely to cutaneous sensation, the strategy used by many manufacturers was to widen the aperture of the shock source to spread the area of contact between the acoustic pulse and the body. This reduced pain at the skin but also narrowed the focal zone [14]. The SLX has a focal width of only ≈ 3 mm and produces higher acoustic pressures (P+≈ 90 MPa) than broader focal width machines (i.e. LG-380: FW ≈ 20 mm, P+≈ 20 MPa; XiXin CS2012: FW ≈ 18 mm, P+ ≈ 17 MPa; HM3: FW ≈ 8 mm, P+≈ 40 MPa) [26,27]. As kidney injury has not been adequately assessed for a narrow focal zone lithotriptor, we used the pig model to characterize the renal response to SWs for the SLX. SWs were administered under conditions that simulated clinical SWL at settings for SW number, power level and SW rate that have been reported for treating patients using this lithotriptor [28]. Data for morphology, lesion size and renal function were compared with similar, previously published data for pigs treated using the Dornier HM3 [10]. The study included assessment of the renal response to slow SW rate, a treatment strategy shown to protect against renal trauma in the pig model [9,10].