The Journal of rheumatology · 2005
Prevalence and risk factors for urolithiasis in primary gout: is a reappraisal needed?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alvarez-Nemegyei José, Medina-Escobedo Martha, Villanueva-Jorge Salha, Vazquez-Mellado Janitzia
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence and risk factors for urolithiasis in primary gout.
METHODS: One hundred forty patients with primary gout were studied. Urolithiasis was defined as a history of urolithiasis, or nephrolithiasis detected via ultrasonography in patients with no previous record of urolithiasis. Patient age, duration of gout, presence of tophi, obesity, alcoholism, high blood pressure, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, family history of urolithiasis, daily urine output, uricemia, urine pH, FeNa, FeUrate, urine pH/FeUrate index, and daily urine excretion of urate, sodium, calcium and potassium were compared between lithiasic and non-lithiasic subjects.
RESULTS: Fifty-five (39%; 95% CI 31-47) patients had urolithiasis, of which 37 (26%) were diagnosed by clinical history and 18 (13%) by ultrasonography. Patients with a silent kidney stone diagnosed by ultrasound tended to have shorter evolution of gout. Aside from urinary H+ ion concentration (lithiasic subjects 5.17 +/- 3.9 microM/l; non-lithiasic subjects 3.80 +/- 3.01 microM/l; p = 0.02), no difference was found between lithiasic and non-lithiasic subjects for the other variables studied.
CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography increased the probability of diagnosing urolithiasis by 50%, meaning the prevalence of urolithiasis in gout is likely higher than previously reported. A higher urinary H+ ion concentration was the only variable associated with urolithiasis. Due to advances in diagnosis of gout and urolithiasis, as well as biochemical assays, the prevalence and risk factors for urolithiasis in gout require reassessment.
METHODS: One hundred forty patients with primary gout were studied. Urolithiasis was defined as a history of urolithiasis, or nephrolithiasis detected via ultrasonography in patients with no previous record of urolithiasis. Patient age, duration of gout, presence of tophi, obesity, alcoholism, high blood pressure, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, family history of urolithiasis, daily urine output, uricemia, urine pH, FeNa, FeUrate, urine pH/FeUrate index, and daily urine excretion of urate, sodium, calcium and potassium were compared between lithiasic and non-lithiasic subjects.
RESULTS: Fifty-five (39%; 95% CI 31-47) patients had urolithiasis, of which 37 (26%) were diagnosed by clinical history and 18 (13%) by ultrasonography. Patients with a silent kidney stone diagnosed by ultrasound tended to have shorter evolution of gout. Aside from urinary H+ ion concentration (lithiasic subjects 5.17 +/- 3.9 microM/l; non-lithiasic subjects 3.80 +/- 3.01 microM/l; p = 0.02), no difference was found between lithiasic and non-lithiasic subjects for the other variables studied.
CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography increased the probability of diagnosing urolithiasis by 50%, meaning the prevalence of urolithiasis in gout is likely higher than previously reported. A higher urinary H+ ion concentration was the only variable associated with urolithiasis. Due to advances in diagnosis of gout and urolithiasis, as well as biochemical assays, the prevalence and risk factors for urolithiasis in gout require reassessment.