ArticleUrolithiasis2026
ABO blood group distribution in patients with upper urinary tract stones: a case-control study.
Article in Urolithiasis, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stones can form anywhere in the urinary system but most commonly develop in the upper urinary tract, particularly the kidneys and ureters. In this study, we examined the relationship between ABO blood type and upper urinary tract stone formation in a region with high disease incidence. This retrospective case-control study included 1,000 patients diagnosed with upper urinary tract stones (kidney or ureter) and 1,000 randomly selected controls presenting to urology outpatient clinics between January 2022 and December 2024. Demographic characteristics, ABO blood groups, body mass index (BMI), and comorbidities were compared between groups. No significant differences in age (39.87 ± 16.75 vs. 41.60 ± 19.38 years, p = 0.160) or sex distribution (69.9% vs. 61.0% male, p = 0.087) were observed. Stone patients had significantly higher BMI (29.87 ± 12.43 vs. 27.24 ± 15.38 kg/m², p = 0.003) and comorbidity rates (38.6% vs. 21.6%, p = 0.006). Blood groups A and O were more frequent in stone-formers than controls (43.2% vs. 37.6%, p = 0.008; and 33.6% vs. 25.5%, p = 0.001, respectively), whereas blood group B was less frequent (15.1% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.003). Multivariate analysis indicated that blood groups A (AOR = 2.43, 95% CI: 1.57–3.76, p < 0.001) and O (AOR = 2.26, 95% CI: 1.42–3.59, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors, while blood group B showed a protective effect (AOR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.38–0.98, p = 0.041). These findings suggest that blood groups A and O blood groups may be associated with urolithiasis susceptibility in this population, though the underlying mechanisms require further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42047801What 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.