Integration and utilization of modern technologies in nephrolithiasis research

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

<p class="first" id="P1">Nephrolithiasis, or stones, is one of the oldest urological diseases, with descriptions and treatment strategies dating back to ancient times. Despite the enormous number of patients affected by stones, a surprising lack of conceptual understanding of many aspects of this disease still exists. This lack of understanding includes mechanisms of stone formation and retention, the clinical relevance of different stone compositions and that of formation patterns and associated pathological features to the overall course of the condition. Fortunately, a number of new tools are available to assist in answering such questions. New renal endoscopes enable kidney visualization in much higher definition than was previously possible, while micro-CT imaging is the optimal technique for assessment of stone microstructure and mineral composition in a nondestructive fashion. Together, these tools have the potential to provide novel insights into the aetiology of stone formation that might unlock new prevention and treatment strategies, and enable more effective management of patients with nephrolithiasis. </p>

Related collections

Most cited references 57

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Anterior cruciate ligament injury and radiologic progression of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Adil Ajuied, Fabian Wong, Christian Smith … (2014)

Knee osteoarthritis after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury has previously been reported. However, there has been no meta-analysis reporting the development and progression of osteoarthritis.

0 comments Cited 124 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Risk assessment scales for pressure ulcer prevention: a systematic review.

Pedro Pancorbo-Hidalgo, Francisco Pedro García-Fernández, Isabel Ma Lopez-Medina … (2006)

This paper reports a systematic review conducted to determine the effectiveness of the use of risk assessment scales for pressure ulcer prevention in clinical practice, degree of validation of risk assessment scales, and effectiveness of risk assessment scales as indicators of risk of developing a pressure ulcer. Pressure ulcers are an important health problem. The best strategy to avoid them is prevention. There are several risk assessment scales for pressure ulcer prevention which complement nurses' clinical judgement. However, some of these have not undergone proper validation. A systematic bibliographical review was conducted, based on a search of 14 databases in four languages using the keywords pressure ulcer or pressure sore or decubitus ulcer and risk assessment. Reports of clinical trials or prospective studies of validation were included in the review. Thirty-three studies were included in the review, three on clinical effectiveness and the rest on scale validation. There is no decrease in pressure ulcer incidence was found which might be attributed to use of an assessment scale. However, the use of scales increases the intensity and effectiveness of prevention interventions. The Braden Scale shows optimal validation and the best sensitivity/specificity balance (57.1%/67.5%, respectively); its score is a good pressure ulcer risk predictor (odds ratio = 4.08, CI 95% = 2.56-6.48). The Norton Scale has reasonable scores for sensitivity (46.8%), specificity (61.8%) and risk prediction (OR = 2.16, CI 95% = 1.03-4.54). The Waterlow Scale offers a high sensitivity score (82.4%), but low specificity (27.4%); with a good risk prediction score (OR = 2.05, CI 95% = 1.11-3.76). Nurses' clinical judgement (only considered in three studies) gives moderate scores for sensitivity (50.6%) and specificity (60.1%), but is not a good pressure ulcer risk predictor (OR = 1.69, CI 95% = 0.76-3.75). There is no evidence that the use of risk assessment scales decreases pressure ulcer incidence. The Braden Scale offers the best balance between sensitivity and specificity and the best risk estimate. Both the Braden and Norton Scales are more accurate than nurses' clinical judgement in predicting pressure ulcer risk.