ArticleUrolithiasis2024
Proof-of-concept for a novel nanotechnology-based treatment for urolithiasis.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent Progression and Treatment Approaches for the Kidney Stone Management.Current drug targets · 2025Pooled it
- The Application of Nanomaterials in Kidney Stone Disease: Emerging Strategies for Early Diagnosis, Targeted Therapy, and Prevention.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Nanofluid-Enhanced Laser Lithotripsy Using Conducting Polymer Nanoparticles.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- History of Renal Stone Surgery: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Proof-of-concept of photonic lithotripsy in an in vitro setting and its ability to fragment the most common stone types is demonstrated. Effectiveness of different classes of photonic nanoparticles in fragmenting human stones is assessed. De-identified human stones were collected after institutional approval. Stones of a size range between 2-4 mm were rehydrated in simulated urine for 24 h. Stones were then coated with a solution of nanoparticles prior to activation with either a 785 nm or 1320 nm near-infrared energy source. Photonic lithotripsy achieved greater than 70% success rate in fragmentating calcium oxalate monohydrate stones using carbon-based nanoparticles for both near-infrared wavelengths. For gold-based nanoparticles, there was a similar success rate with the 785 nm wavelength but a significant decrease when using the 1320 nm wavelength energy source. All stones fragmented with the energy source at a distance ≥ 20 mm from the stone's surface. Limitations include the use of mixed-composition stones, a lack of complete stone immersion in liquid during treatment, and smaller stone size. Different classes of nanoparticles when excited with a near-infrared energy source can fragment common stone types in vitro. This technology has the potential to change the way we approach and treat patients with urolithiasis in a clinical setting.
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.