Observational studyBMC urology2025
Evidence of bacterial imprints in different types of non-struvite kidney stones.
Observational study in BMC urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biophysical and functional characterization of the Escherichia coli Dr fimbrial envelope reveals its importance for pathogenesis and lithogenesis.PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- Investigation of the predictive value of Hounsfield units in predicting stone culture results in urinary stone disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies of renal lithiasis identified bacterial imprints in apatite phosphate stones and mixed calcium oxalate/apatite phosphate stones, neither of which contained struvite.
methodsThis cross-sectional observational study examined 903 stones that were collected from 844 patients during the course of 1 year. All stones were initially examined by stereoscopic microscopy. Stone fragments were then examined by scanning electron microscopy + microanalysis by X-ray dispersive energy and by Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy. When bacterial imprints were detected, biochemical and bacteriological analysis of the patient's urine was performed.
resultsWe found 8 renal stones that had bacterial imprints but no struvite. All 8 stones contained hydroxyapatite, and the imprints were located in this region. Five stones contained hydroxyapatite as the major component, two stones were mixed hydroxyapatite/calcium oxalate dihydrate stones, one was a papillary calcium oxalate monohydrate stone in which bacterial imprints were located at Randall's plaque and the other was a cavity calcium oxalate monohydrate stone that contained hydroxyapatite in the central core with bacterial imprints.
conclusionWe identified bacterial imprints in different types of renal stones that lacked struvite, including papillary stones, and these imprints were always present in a hydroxyapatite matrix. Notably, a urinary pH above 6.0 favors the formation of apatite phosphates and the growth of bacteria. Our findings point to the importance of controlling urinary pH to prevent bacteria-mediated calculogenic processes. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.