4.8 Review

Recurrent renal stone disease - advances in pathogenesis and clinical management

Journal

LANCET
Volume 358, Issue 9282, Pages 651-656

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05782-8

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Kidney stones are common in industrialised nations: up to 15% of white men and 6% of all women will develop one stone, with recurrence in about half these people. Risk factors for formation of stones include urinary promoters (calcium, urate, cystine, and sodium) and urinary inhibitors (magnesium, citrate, and nephrocalcin). Acute renal colic can be precipitated by dehydration and reduced urine output, increased protein intake, heavy physical exercise, and various medicines. Such colic manifests as severe loin pain and can be accompanied by frequent urination, dysuria, oliguria, and haematuria. Documentation of stone characteristics is extremely important: type, size, location, and underlying metabolic abnormalities. Such details can be obtained with a combination of biochemical investigations, microscopic examination of urine under polarised light, and an intravenous pyelogram. Ultrasonography and plain abdominal radiographs are also useful, especially for patients unable to tolerate an intravenous pyelogram. Acute therapy includes complete pain relief, rehydration, and encouragement of diuresis. Long-term management encompasses education of patients with regard to diet and fluid intake, control of calciuria, citrate replacement, and treatment of any underlying urinary-tract infection or metabolic abnormality. Stones smaller than 5 mm normally pass spontaneously, whereas larger stones, as big as 2 cm, are best treated with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. All physicians should have a clear understanding of the pathogenesis and clinical management (acute treatment and prevention of recurrence) of renal stone disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available