ArticleUrolithiasis2021
Is medical treatment necessary for infants with small urinary stones?
Article in Urolithiasis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Why is childhood urolithiasis increasing? Etiology, diagnosis and management: a single-center experience.Journal of nephrology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urinary stone disease is a common condition. We investigated the usefulness of medical treatment for infants with urinary stones 5 mm or smaller. The study included 197 infants (86 girls and 111 boys) with urolithiasis ≤ 5 mm who were referred to our Department of Nephrology between 2014 and 2016. Infants with metabolic or anatomical risk factors requiring medical treatment were excluded from the study. We retrospectively reviewed urine and serum metabolic profiles and compared stone resolution rates in patients who did and did not receive treatment. The mean age at diagnosis was 5.2 months (range, 14 days to 12 months). The most common complaint was restlessness (n = 92, 46.7%), and 49 infants (24.9%) were asymptomatic. Multiple stones were detected in 166 infants (84.3%). Hypomagnesuria, hypocitraturia, and hypercalciuria were present in 25.3, 19.7, and 18.7% of patients, respectively. Stones < 3 mm (microlithiasis) were detected in 97 infants (49.2%), and 100 (50.8%) patients had 3-5 mm stones. In total, 130 infants (66.5%) received regular treatment and 67 (33.5%) were not treated. Stone resolution was significantly higher in the group receiving K-citrate treatment at the 6th month follow-up, while there were no significantly difference between the two groups at the 12th month control. No previous studies have investigated treatment outcomes in infants with 3-5 mm urinary stones. According to our results, K-citrate treatment may accelerate the resolution of the stone in infants with stones smaller than 5 mm.
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.