ArticleMedical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina)2014
Incidence of osteoporosis in patients with urolithiasis.
Article in Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with nephrolithiasis andFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023Pooled it
- Nephrolithiasis, bone mineral density, osteoporosis, and fractures: a systematic review and comparative meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2016Pooled it
- Bone mineral density and sex hormone binding globulin as potential mediators of the causal effect of urolithiasis on osteoporosis risk: a Mendelian randomization.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- The Reciprocal Relationship between Osteoporosis and Renal Stones.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Correlation of Osteoporosis and Calcium Urolithiasis in Adult Population.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2016Article
- Gender Representation of Osteoporosis in Patients with Urolithiasis.Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) · 2015Article
- The importance of urinary calcium in postmenopausal women with osteoporotic fracture.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du CanadaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClinical researches have shown an increased bone disintegration and lower bone mass in patients with calcium urolithiasis. GOAL: The goal of our research was to establish the incidence of osteoporosis in adult patients with calcium urolithiasis, on the basis of measuring mineral bone density, using DEXA method, with a special reflection on age subgroups. MATERIAL AND
methodsClinical research was prospective and it was implemented at the University Clinical Center of Banja Luka, at the Clinic for Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases and at the Urology Clinic. Material in this research consisted of patients divided in two groups, a working and a control group. One hundred and twenty (120) patients were included in both these groups, divided in three age subgroups: 20-40, 40-60 and over 60. The working group consisted of the patients with calcium urolithiasis and the control group consisted of patients without calcium urolithiasis. Establishing of mineral bone density at L2-L4 of lumbal spine vertebrae and hip was done for the patients in both these groups, using DEXA method.
resultsAnalysis of mineral bone density using DEXA method in patients in age groups of working and control groups, as well as in the total sample of working and control groups, have shown that the patients of the working group, over 60, had a decreased mineral bone density (30% of osteopenia and 15% osteoporosis) significantly more expressed when compared to the other two age groups (12.5% in the subgroup 20-40 and 17.5% in the subgroup 40-60), which presents a statistically significant difference (p<0.05). In the control group, when taking into account age groups, osteopenia and osteoporosis were marked in 37.5% and 2.5% in the group of patients over 60, whereas in the youngest population, 5% of osteopenia was found, which presents a statistically significant difference (p<0.05). When observing the total sample of working and control group, there was a statistically significant difference in the working and control group (p<0.01); incidence of osteoporosis in the working group amounted to 7.5% and in the control group it was 0.8%.
conclusionUrolithiasis and osteoporosis are two multifactorial diseases which are evidently reciprocal. This is why we suggest that educating the population about the risk factors for occurrence of these diseases as well as preventive measures that may contribute to their decrease should begin as early as possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.