ArticleUrolithiasis2020
Are conventional stone analysis techniques reliable for the identification of 2,8-dihydroxyadenine kidney stones? A case series.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adenine phosphoribosyltransferase deficiency and 2,8-dihydroxyadeninuria.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Review
- Adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT) deficiency: an increasingly recognized disease.International urology and nephrology · 2025Review
- Shockwaves and the Rolling Stones: An Overview of Pediatric Stone Disease.Kidney international reports · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We have recently encountered patients incorrectly diagnosed with adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT) deficiency due to misidentification of kidney stones as 2,8-dihydroxyadenine (DHA) stones. The objective of this study was to examine the accuracy of stone analysis for identification of DHA. Medical records of patients referred to the APRT Deficiency Research Program of the Rare Kidney Stone Consortium in 2010-2018 with a diagnosis of APRT deficiency based on kidney stone analysis were reviewed. The diagnosis was verified by measurement of APRT enzyme activity or genetic testing. Attenuated total reflection-Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectra of pure crystalline DHA and a kidney stone obtained from one of the confirmed APRT deficiency cases were generated. The ATR-FTIR spectrum of the kidney stone matched the crystalline DHA spectrum and was used for comparison with available infrared spectra of stone samples from the patients. Of 17 patients referred, 14 had sufficient data available to be included in the study. In all 14 cases, the stone analysis had been performed by FTIR spectroscopy. The diagnosis of APRT deficiency was confirmed in seven cases and rejected in the remaining seven cases. Comparison of the ATR-FTIR spectrum of the DHA stone with the FTIR spectra from three patients who did not have APRT deficiency showed no indication of DHA as a stone component. Misidentification of DHA as a kidney stone component by clinical laboratories appears common among patients referred to our program. Since current clinical protocols used to interpret infrared spectra for stone analysis cannot be considered reliable for the identification of DHA stones, the diagnosis of APRT deficiency must be confirmed by other methods.
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.