ArticleKorean journal of urology2015
Can a dual-energy computed tomography predict unsuitable stone components for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy?
Article in Korean journal of urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Assessment of pancreatic ductal stone density on non-contrast computed tomography for predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- A New Parameter for Calcium Oxalate Stones: Impact of Linear Calculus Density on Non-Contrast Computed Tomography.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Pre-operative Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy Characterisation of Kidney Stones with Second-Generation Dual-Source Dual-Energy Computed Tomography.The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS · 2020Article
- Predictors of Uric Acid Stones: Mean Stone Density, Stone Heterogeneity Index, and Variation Coefficient of Stone Density by Single-Energy Non-Contrast Computed Tomography and Urinary pH.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- Stone heterogeneity index on single-energy noncontrast computed tomography can be a positive predictor of urinary stone composition.PloS one · 2018Article
- Management of upper ureteral stones exceeding 15 mm in diameter: Shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureteroscopy with holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy.SAGE open medicine · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the potential of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) to identify urinary stone components, particularly uric acid and calcium oxalate monohydrate, which are unsuitable for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis clinical study included 246 patients who underwent removal of urinary stones and an analysis of stone components between November 2009 and August 2013. All patients received preoperative DECT using two energy values (80 kVp and 140 kVp). Hounsfield units (HU) were measured and matched to the stone component.
resultsSignificant differences in HU values were observed between uric acid and nonuric acid stones at the 80 and 140 kVp energy values (p<0.001). All uric acid stones were red on color-coded DECT images, whereas 96.3% of the nonuric acid stones were blue. Patients with calcium oxalate stones were divided into two groups according to the amount of monohydrate (calcium oxalate monohydrate group: monohydrate≥90%, calcium oxalate dihydrate group: monohydrate<90%). Significant differences in HU values were detected between the two groups at both energy values (p<0.001).
conclusionsDECT improved the characterization of urinary stone components and was a useful method for identifying uric acid and calcium oxalate monohydrate stones, which are unsuitable for ESWL.
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.