Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27915394›Full record

ReviewUrolithiasis2017

Timelines of the "free-particle" and "fixed-particle" models of stone-formation: theoretical and experimental investigations.

D J Kok, W Boellaard, Y Ridwan, V A Levchenko

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Urolithiasis, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Intercalated bacterial biofilms are intrinsic internal components of calcium-based kidney stones.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Tumour lysis syndrome.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024
    Review
  10. Theranostic roles of machine learning in clinical management of kidney stone disease.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

D J KokDepartment of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. d.kok@erasmusmc.nl.
W BoellaardDepartment of Urology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Y RidwanDepartment of Radiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
V A LevchenkoCentre for Accelerator Science, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, Kirrawee, Australia.
Erasmus University Rotterdam · NLAustralian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation · AUErasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two major theories on renal stone formation will be reviewed, the "free-particle" and "fixed-particle" mechanisms. These theories combine data on intrinsic factors (inborn metabolic errors), extrinsic factors (diet), renal cell responses and the physico-chemistry and biochemistry of urine into mechanisms of stone formation. This paper describes the specific role of time in both mechanisms. The timeline of crystal- and stone formation was deducted from literature data and was measured for two stones using radioisotope decay analysis. The stones of similar size and composition showed, respectively, a timeline of a few years and a development that took decades. In combination with data on stone architecture and patient characteristics these timelines are explained using the free-particle and fixed-particle mechanisms. Consideration of the timeline of stone formation has clinical implications. We conclude that the fixed-particle mechanism can be a slow process where decades pass between the first formation of a precipitate in the renal interstitium and the clinical presentation of the stone. Added to the fact that the mechanism of this initial precipitation is still ill defined, the conditions that started fixed-particle stone formation in an individual patient can be obscure. Blood and urine analysis in such patients does not necessarily reveal the individual's risk for recurrence as lifestyle may have changed over time. This is in fact what defines the so-called idiopathic stoneformers. For these patients, prevention of outgrowth of previously formed precipitates, papillary plaques, may be more relevant than prevention of new plaque formation. In contrast, a patient who has formed a stone in a relatively short time through the free-particle mechanism is more likely to show abnormal values in blood and urine that explain the starting event of stone formation. In these patients, measurement of such values provides useful information to guide preventive measures.

Indexed as

Models, ChemicalCrystallizationHumansKidney CalculiTime FactorsAgeCalcium oxalateCalcium phosphateIsotopeStone formationUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID27915394
PMCPMC5250668
OpenAlexW2557811828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.