Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31062069›Full record

ArticleUrolithiasis2020

Assessment of conservative dietary management as a method for normalization of 24-h urine pH in stone formers.

Daniel A Wollin, Leah G Davis, Brenton B Winship, Evan C Carlos, Westin R Tom, John R Asplin, Andrzej S Kosinski, Charles D Scales, Michael N Ferrandino, Glenn M Preminger and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Urolithiasis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 44% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel A WollinDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. daniel.wollin@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2913-0418
Leah G DavisDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Brenton B WinshipDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Evan C CarlosDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Westin R TomDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
John R AsplinLitholink Corporation, Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings®, Chicago, IL, USA.
Andrzej S KosinskiDepartment of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Charles D ScalesDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Michael N FerrandinoDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Glenn M PremingerDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Michael E LipkinDivision of Urologic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Duke Medical Center · USDuke University · USLabCorp (United States) · USVA Boston Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low urine pH is a metabolic risk factor for stone formation. While medical therapy is typically prescribed (as urinary alkalinization), patients typically prefer dietary modifications. We aimed to assess capacity to alter urine pH with dietary management alone. We analyzed a retrospective cohort of stone formers seen between 2000 and 2015 with multiple 24-h urine collections (24hUC). Patients ≥ 18 years old with low urine pH (< 6.0) were included; those prescribed alkalinizing agents or thiazides were excluded. Demographic data, 24hUC parameters, and medications were abstracted. 24hUC was utilized to calculate gastrointestinal alkali absorption (GIAA). The primary outcome was urine pH ≥ 6.0 on second 24hUC. Predictors were selected utilizing multivariable logistic regression. The database consisted of 2197 stone formers; 224 of these met inclusion criteria. On second 24hUC, 124 (55.4%) achieved a favorable pH ≥ 6.0. On univariable analysis, a second pH ≥ 6.0 was associated with high initial pH, low initial sulfate, younger age, increase in citrate/GIAA/urine volume, and decrease in ammonium (P < 0.02). On multivariable analysis, high initial pH (OR = 23.64, P < 0.001), high initial GIAA (OR = 1.03, P = 0.001), lower initial sulfate (OR = 0.95, P < 0.001), increase in urine volume (OR = 2.19, P = 0.001), increase in GIAA (OR = 8.6, P < 0.001), increase in citrate (OR = 2.7, P = 0.014), decrease in ammonium (OR = 0.18, P < 0.001), and younger age (OR = 0.97, P = 0.025) were associated with a second pH ≥ 6.0. The analysis demonstrated a corrected AUC of 0.853. These data suggest that certain dietary recommendations (increases in urine volume, citrate, GIAA, and decreased acid load) may normalize urine pH in a select group of patients. This may allow urologists to counsel patients with low urine pH on possibility of success with dietary modification alone.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge FactorsAlkaliesConservative TreatmentFemaleGastrointestinal AbsorptionHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationKidney CalculiMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeUrineAlkalies24-h urine collectionDiet therapyGastrointestinal alkali absorptionUrine pHUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID31062069
OpenAlexW2943851765

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.