Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego

PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva [verfasserIn] Djamile Cordeiro de Matos [verfasserIn] Sônia Leite da Silva [verfasserIn] Elizabeth De Francesco Daher [verfasserIn] Henry de Holanda Campos [verfasserIn] Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2010

Schlagwörter:	Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira - Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004, 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:25 ; year:2010 ; number:5 ; pages:444-448

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ018235484

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ018235484
003	DE-627
005	20230503073748.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230226s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ018235484
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RD1-811
100	0		\|a Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
264		1	\|c 2010
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos.
650		4	\|a Morfologia
650		4	\|a Cálculos Urinários
650		4	\|a Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária
650		4	\|a Morphology
650		4	\|a Urinary Calculi
650		4	\|a Urinary Bladder Calculi
653		0	\|a Surgery
700	0		\|a Djamile Cordeiro de Matos \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Sônia Leite da Silva \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Elizabeth De Francesco Daher \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Henry de Holanda Campos \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira \|d Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004 \|g 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 \|w (DE-627)320500519 \|w (DE-600)2012156-8 \|x 16782674 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:25 \|g year:2010 \|g number:5 \|g pages:444-448
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 25 \|j 2010 \|e 5 \|h 444-448

Indexfelder

author_variant	s f r d s sfrds d c d m dcdm s l d s slds e d f d edfd h d h c hdhc c a b d s cabds
matchkey_str	article:16782674:2010----::hmclnmrhlgclnlssfinytnsdulbidoprtvsuynieuiamrogcdcc
hierarchy_sort_str	2010
callnumber-subject-code	RD
publishDate	2010
allfields	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 doi (DE-627)DOAJ018235484 (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva verfasserin aut Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos. Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi Surgery Djamile Cordeiro de Matos verfasserin aut Sônia Leite da Silva verfasserin aut Elizabeth De Francesco Daher verfasserin aut Henry de Holanda Campos verfasserin aut Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva verfasserin aut In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 (DE-627)320500519 (DE-600)2012156-8 16782674 nnns volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 25 2010 5 444-448
spelling	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 doi (DE-627)DOAJ018235484 (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva verfasserin aut Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos. Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi Surgery Djamile Cordeiro de Matos verfasserin aut Sônia Leite da Silva verfasserin aut Elizabeth De Francesco Daher verfasserin aut Henry de Holanda Campos verfasserin aut Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva verfasserin aut In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 (DE-627)320500519 (DE-600)2012156-8 16782674 nnns volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 25 2010 5 444-448
allfields_unstemmed	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 doi (DE-627)DOAJ018235484 (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva verfasserin aut Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos. Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi Surgery Djamile Cordeiro de Matos verfasserin aut Sônia Leite da Silva verfasserin aut Elizabeth De Francesco Daher verfasserin aut Henry de Holanda Campos verfasserin aut Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva verfasserin aut In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 (DE-627)320500519 (DE-600)2012156-8 16782674 nnns volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 25 2010 5 444-448
allfieldsGer	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 doi (DE-627)DOAJ018235484 (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva verfasserin aut Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos. Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi Surgery Djamile Cordeiro de Matos verfasserin aut Sônia Leite da Silva verfasserin aut Elizabeth De Francesco Daher verfasserin aut Henry de Holanda Campos verfasserin aut Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva verfasserin aut In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 (DE-627)320500519 (DE-600)2012156-8 16782674 nnns volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 25 2010 5 444-448
allfieldsSound	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 doi (DE-627)DOAJ018235484 (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva verfasserin aut Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego 2010 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos. Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi Surgery Djamile Cordeiro de Matos verfasserin aut Sônia Leite da Silva verfasserin aut Elizabeth De Francesco Daher verfasserin aut Henry de Holanda Campos verfasserin aut Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva verfasserin aut In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 (DE-627)320500519 (DE-600)2012156-8 16782674 nnns volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 kostenfrei http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 25 2010 5 444-448
language	English
source	In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448
sourceStr	In Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira 25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448 volume:25 year:2010 number:5 pages:444-448
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi Surgery
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva @@aut@@ Djamile Cordeiro de Matos @@aut@@ Sônia Leite da Silva @@aut@@ Elizabeth De Francesco Daher @@aut@@ Henry de Holanda Campos @@aut@@ Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2010-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	320500519
id	DOAJ018235484
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ018235484</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503073748.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ018235484</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD1-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Morfologia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cálculos Urinários</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Morphology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Urinary Calculi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Urinary Bladder Calculi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Djamile Cordeiro de Matos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sônia Leite da Silva</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Elizabeth De Francesco Daher</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Henry de Holanda Campos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira</subfield><subfield code="d">Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004</subfield><subfield code="g">25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)320500519</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2012156-8</subfield><subfield code="x">16782674</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:25</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:444-448</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">25</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">5</subfield><subfield code="h">444-448</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva
spellingShingle	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva misc RD1-811 misc Morfologia misc Cálculos Urinários misc Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária misc Morphology misc Urinary Calculi misc Urinary Bladder Calculi misc Surgery Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
authorStr	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)320500519
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RD1-811
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	16782674
topic_title	RD1-811 Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego Morfologia Cálculos Urinários Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária Morphology Urinary Calculi Urinary Bladder Calculi
topic	misc RD1-811 misc Morfologia misc Cálculos Urinários misc Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária misc Morphology misc Urinary Calculi misc Urinary Bladder Calculi misc Surgery
topic_unstemmed	misc RD1-811 misc Morfologia misc Cálculos Urinários misc Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária misc Morphology misc Urinary Calculi misc Urinary Bladder Calculi misc Surgery
topic_browse	misc RD1-811 misc Morfologia misc Cálculos Urinários misc Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária misc Morphology misc Urinary Calculi misc Urinary Bladder Calculi misc Surgery
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
hierarchy_parent_id	320500519
hierarchy_top_title	Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)320500519 (DE-600)2012156-8
title	Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ018235484 (DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569
title_full	Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
author_sort	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva
journal	Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
journalStr	Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2010
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	444
author_browse	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva Djamile Cordeiro de Matos Sônia Leite da Silva Elizabeth De Francesco Daher Henry de Holanda Campos Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva
container_volume	25
class	RD1-811
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva
doi_str_mv	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
callnumber	RD1-811
title_auth	Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
abstract	PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos.
abstractGer	PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos.
abstract_unstemmed	PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	5
title_short	Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego
url	https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011 https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569 http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011 https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650 https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674
remote_bool	true
author2	Djamile Cordeiro de Matos Sônia Leite da Silva Elizabeth De Francesco Daher Henry de Holanda Campos Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva
author2Str	Djamile Cordeiro de Matos Sônia Leite da Silva Elizabeth De Francesco Daher Henry de Holanda Campos Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva
ppnlink	320500519
callnumber-subject	RD - Surgery
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011
callnumber-a	RD1-811
up_date	2024-07-03T16:43:09.569Z
_version_	1803576923469643776
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ018235484</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503073748.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2010 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ018235484</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD1-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Silvia Fernandes Ribeiro da Silva</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PURPOSE: To compare chemical to morphological kidney stone composition analysis based on a sample of 50 stones retrieved from patients at a nephrology service. METHODS: The chemical analysis was performed with a Bioclin® kit, while a 10-mm magnifying glass (10x; Prolabo, Paris, France) was employed in the morphological analysis. Findings obtained with the two methods were compared and classified as concordant (100% agreement), partly concordant (concordant for major components, discordant for minor components) or discordant (discordant for major components). RESULTS: In the chemical analysis, the most commonly observed major component was calcium (70%), followed by oxalate (66%), ammonium (56%), urate (28%) and carbonate (24%). In the morphological analysis, the most commonly observed major components were calcium phosphate and magnesium (32% each), followed by calcium oxalate monohydrate (24%), uric acid and urates (20% each), calcium oxalate dihydrate (18%) and cystine (6%). Infectious kidney stones were identified in 34% and 24% of cases by morphological and chemical analysis, respectively. Thirty-eight percent of the samples were classified as concordant, 52% were partly concordant and 10% were discordant. CONCLUSION: We suggest kidney stones be routinely submitted to both types of analysis for a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in lithogenesis.<br<OBJETIVO: Comparar a análise química com a análise morfológica de 50 cálculos urinários provenientes de pacientes em um serviço de nefrologia. MÉTODOS: A análise química foi realizada utilizando o kit da Bioclin®, enquanto que a morfológica foi realizada com auxílio de uma lupa de 10mm (Prolabo, Paris, France). A comparação entre as técnicas foi classificada em concordante (100% de concordância), parcialmente concordante (componentes majoritários concordantes e minoritários discordantes) e discordante (discordância nos componentes majoritários). RESULTADOS: Na análise química os principais componentes majoritários foram cálcio (70%), oxalato (66%), amônio (56%), urato (28%) e carbonato (24%). Na análise morfológica os principais componentes majoritários foram fosfato cálcico (PCa) e magnesiano-PCa (32%), oxalato de cálcio monohidratado (24%), ácido úrico e uratos (20%), oxalato de cálcio dihidratado (18%) e cistina (6%). Cálculos de infecção foram identificados em 34% e 24% casos pela análise morfológica e química, respectivamente. Concordância total foi observada em 38%, concordância parcial em 52% e discordância em 10%. CONCLUSÃO: Sugere-se a utilização simultânea das duas técnicas para melhor compreensão dos mecanismos litogênicos.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Morfologia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cálculos Urinários</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cálculos da Bexiga Urinária</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Morphology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Urinary Calculi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Urinary Bladder Calculi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Djamile Cordeiro de Matos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sônia Leite da Silva</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Elizabeth De Francesco Daher</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Henry de Holanda Campos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carlos Antonio Bruno da Silva</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira</subfield><subfield code="d">Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia, 2004</subfield><subfield code="g">25(2010), 5, Seite 444-448</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)320500519</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2012156-8</subfield><subfield code="x">16782674</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:25</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2010</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:444-448</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-86502010000500011</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/16913e4203514b58b35fad56191f3569</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502010000500011</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0102-8650</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1678-2674</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">25</subfield><subfield code="j">2010</subfield><subfield code="e">5</subfield><subfield code="h">444-448</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.398837

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Chemical and morphological analysis of kidney stones: a double-blind comparative study Análise química e morfológica de cálculos renais: estudo comparativo duplo-cego

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?