ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Separate core-shell analysis of urinary stones may influence specific metaphylaxis.
Article in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe recommendation for urinary stone metaphylaxis is based on urinary stone analysis. It is not known to what extent the separate analysis of the core and shell differ and can therefore possibly influence the metaphylaxis.
methodsIncluded were 19,973 stone analyses from 2021 to 2022 using infrared spectroscopy. For mixed stones, the individual components were specified semi-quantitatively in 5% increments. While 62% of the stones were analyzed using a representative sample of the whole stone, a separate core-shell analysis was performed in 38%. Analysis focused on evaluating the distribution of the most common urinary stone minerals.
resultsIn 22.9% of cases, difference in analysis between core and shell could be measured, in 13.6%, analyses differed by at least 10%. Here, a clear shift in the distribution of stone types compared to the distribution using a single representative probe could be demonstrated: Calcium oxalate occurred significantly less frequently in this group (50.2% vs. 73.3%), while struvite (5.9% vs. 2.7%) and carbonate apatite (25,2% vs. 12.1%) occurred significantly more frequently. The number of components detected in the stones increased in separate analysis and were even more when core and shell differ. In 4.3%, the main component between core and shell changed. DISCUSSION: In 13.6% of stones, there were clinically significant differences between core and shell. The change in the main component between core and shell may indicate the stone genesis. Separate core-shell analysis can influence and possibly optimize the metaphylaxis. Especially in the high-risk situation and recurrent stones, a separate core-shell analysis may be beneficial.
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.