Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25721435›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2015

Urolithiasis--an interdisciplinary diagnostic, therapeutic and secondary preventive challenge.

Christian Fisang, Ralf Anding, Stefan C Müller, Stefan Latz, Norbert Laube

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Impact of body mass index on size and composition of urinary stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. [Stones in the lower pole and their treatment].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Insulin Resistance and Urolithiasis as a Challenge for a Dietitian.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christian Fisang
Ralf Anding
Stefan C Müller
Stefan Latz
Norbert Laube
University Hospital Bonn · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prevalence of urolithiasis in Germany is 4.7%; its incidence has trebled in the last three decades. The risk of recurrence is 50-80%, depending on the type of stone, unless secondary prevention is instituted. Risk-adapted secondary prevention lowers this risk to 10-15%.

methodsThis review is based on publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed using the key words "urolithiasis," "urinary stones," "epidemiology," "lithogenesis," "biominerals," "risk factors," and "diagnosis, therapy, metaphylaxis." These publications were evaluated with the aid of the urolithiasis guideline of the European Association of Urology.

resultsAcute renal colic can usually be diagnosed without sophisticated equipment. Stones can be dealt with by a variety of techniques depending on their size and location, including extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy, ureterorenoscopy, percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy, and open surgery. Most ureteric stones of diameter up to 5 mm pass spontaneously. 75% of patients have no complications. The basic evaluation needed for secondary prevention can be carried out by any physician on an ambulatory basis. In the 25% of patients who have complications, a more extensive interdisciplinary evaluation of metabolic parameters should be performed in a clinical center for urinary stones.

conclusionUrolithiasis has many causes and can be treated in many different ways. An extensive metabolic work-up is often necessary for secondary prevention. The various treatment options must be considered for their suitability in each individual patient. Robust data are now available on surgical and interventional methods, but there are as yet no high-quality trials of secondary prevention. Further research should concentrate on the etiology and pathogenesis of urolithiasis.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Techniques, UrologicalLithotripsyUrologic Surgical ProceduresBiomarkersGermanyHumansPatient Care TeamRecurrenceSecondary PreventionUrolithiasisBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID25721435
PMCPMC4349965
OpenAlexW2398998624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.