Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30830655›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2019

Defining a clinically significant struvite stone: a non-randomized retrospective study.

Amihay Nevo, Mohammed Shahait, Anup Shah, Stephen Jackman, Timothy Averch

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Kidney Stone Prevention.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amihay NevoDepartment of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. amihaynevo@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8786-181X
Mohammed ShahaitDepartment of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Anup ShahDepartment of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Stephen JackmanDepartment of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Timothy AverchDepartment of Urology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo study the association between a stone's struvite content and clinical outcomes and to determine a clinically significant cutoff for defining struvite stones. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a retrospective study of all patients who underwent ureteroscopy or PCNL at our institution between 2012 and 2017 and had any component of struvite in the stone analysis. Patients were divided into four groups based on percent struvite content: A (1-25%), B (26-50%), C (51-75%), and D (76-100%). Bacterial characteristics were compared between groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the association between struvite content and postoperative SIRS. Log-rank test was used to compare between the four groups' recurrence rates.

resultsA total of 123 patients were included in the study. Positive preoperative urine culture was found in 31%, 81%, 87%, and 90% of patients from group A, B, C, and D, respectively. E. Coli was the most common pathogen in group A (54%), while Proteus was the most common pathogen in groups C (53%) and D (47%). Enterococci isolation rates remained similar between groups A-D, ranging from 23 to 33%. Postoperative SIRS occurred in 2.4%, 21.3%, 26.7%and 47.4% of the patients from groups A, B, C, and D, respectively, and was associated with struvite content and age on multivariate analysis. Increasing struvite content was associated with higher 2-year recurrence rate.

conclusionsHigher struvite content is associated with a higher frequency of traditional urea splitting bacteria in urine culture, higher risk for postoperative SIRS, and higher recurrence rate. Struvite content greater than 25% can be used to define a clinically significant struvite stone.

Indexed as

AgedBacteriuriaEnterobacteriaceaeEnterococcusEscherichia coliFemaleHumansKidney CalculiKlebsiellaMaleMiddle AgedNephrolithotomy, PercutaneousPreoperative PeriodProteusRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesStruviteInfectionNephrolithiasisPCNLStruviteUreteroscopy

Identifiers

PMID30830655
OpenAlexW2920456945

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.