Helene Jung1, Sero Andonian2, Dean Assimos3, Timothy Averch4, Petrisor Geavlete5, Yasuo Kohjimoto6, Andreas Neisius7, Joe Philip8, Alberto Saita9, Hemendra Shah10, Palle Jörn Osther11. 1. Urological Research Center, Lillebaelt Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Kabbeltoft 25, 7100, Vejle, Denmark. 2. Department of Urology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. 3. Department of Urology, U.A.B. School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA. 4. UPMC Department of Urology, Pittsburg, PA, USA. 5. Department of Urology, Saint John Emergency Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. 6. Department of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, Kimiidera, Wakayama, Japan. 7. Klinik für Urologie, Universitätsmedizin Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 8. Bristol Urological Institute, Bristol, UK. 9. Department of Urology, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. 10. Urolab Superspeciality Clinic, Andheri, Mumbai, India. 11. Urological Research Center, Lillebaelt Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Kabbeltoft 25, 7100, Vejle, Denmark. palle.joern.osther@rsyd.dk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to provide current best evidence for evaluation, dietary, and medical management of patients with urolithiasis. METHODS: Literature addressing evaluation, dietary, and medical management of urolithiasis was searched. Papers were analyzed and rated according to level of evidence (LOE), whereupon a synthesis of the evidence was made. Grade of recommendation (GOR) was judged from individual clinical experience and knowledge of the evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. RESULTS: It is obvious that different stone diseases influence the life of stone-forming individuals very differently, and that evaluation and medical management should be personalized according to risk of recurrence, severity of stone disease, presence of associated medical conditions, and patient's motivation. With regard to evaluation, dietary and medical management of patients with urolithiasis evidence from the literature suggest that selective metabolic evaluation may lead to rational dietary and medical management. Statements based on LOE and GOR are provided to guide clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The provided evidence for evaluation of patients with urolithiasis aims at defining patients at high risk for recurrent/complicated stone disease. Based on this approach, evidence-based dietary and medical management regimes are suggested.
PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to provide current best evidence for evaluation, dietary, and medical management of patients with urolithiasis. METHODS: Literature addressing evaluation, dietary, and medical management of urolithiasis was searched. Papers were analyzed and rated according to level of evidence (LOE), whereupon a synthesis of the evidence was made. Grade of recommendation (GOR) was judged from individual clinical experience and knowledge of the evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine. RESULTS: It is obvious that different stone diseases influence the life of stone-forming individuals very differently, and that evaluation and medical management should be personalized according to risk of recurrence, severity of stone disease, presence of associated medical conditions, and patient's motivation. With regard to evaluation, dietary and medical management of patients with urolithiasis evidence from the literature suggest that selective metabolic evaluation may lead to rational dietary and medical management. Statements based on LOE and GOR are provided to guide clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The provided evidence for evaluation of patients with urolithiasis aims at defining patients at high risk for recurrent/complicated stone disease. Based on this approach, evidence-based dietary and medical management regimes are suggested.
Authors: Howard A Fink; Joseph W Akornor; Pranav S Garimella; Rod MacDonald; Andrea Cutting; Indulis R Rutks; Manoj Monga; Timothy J Wilt Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2009-03-13 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Michael S Borofsky; Jessica E Paonessa; Andrew P Evan; James C Williams; Fredric L Coe; Elaine M Worcester; James E Lingeman Journal: J Endourol Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Giovanni Gambaro; Emanuele Croppi; Fredric Coe; James Lingeman; Orson Moe; Elen Worcester; Noor Buchholz; David Bushinsky; Gary C Curhan; Pietro Manuel Ferraro; Daniel Fuster; David S Goldfarb; Ita Pfeferman Heilberg; Bernard Hess; John Lieske; Martino Marangella; Dawn Milliner; Glen M Preminger; Jose' Manuel Reis Santos; Khashayar Sakhaee; Kemal Sarica; Roswitha Siener; Pasquale Strazzullo; James C Williams Journal: J Nephrol Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 3.902
Authors: Bo Mussmann; Maryann Hardy; Helene Jung; Ming Ding; Palle J Osther; Maja Lynge Fransen; Pernille Wied Greisen; Ole Graumann Journal: J Med Radiat Sci Date: 2021-06-22