Fasting and 24-h urine pH in patients with urolithiasis using potassium citrate.

IF 1.5 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY American journal of clinical and experimental urology Pub Date : 2022-06-15 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01
Isabela Bertanholi Leme da Silva, Carmen Petean Amaro, João Luiz Amaro, Natália Baraldi Cunha, Matheus Augusto Callegari, Hamilto Akihissa Yamamoto, Rodrigo Guerra, Juliany Gomes Quitzan, Leonardo O Reis, Paulo Roberto Kawano
{"title":"Fasting and 24-h urine pH in patients with urolithiasis using potassium citrate.","authors":"Isabela Bertanholi Leme da Silva,&nbsp;Carmen Petean Amaro,&nbsp;João Luiz Amaro,&nbsp;Natália Baraldi Cunha,&nbsp;Matheus Augusto Callegari,&nbsp;Hamilto Akihissa Yamamoto,&nbsp;Rodrigo Guerra,&nbsp;Juliany Gomes Quitzan,&nbsp;Leonardo O Reis,&nbsp;Paulo Roberto Kawano","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the correlation between the pH readings in 24-h urine and the random fasting specimen in patients with urolithiasis using 2 methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 114 patients with urinary lithiasis using potassium citrate were prospectively analyzed. All patients collected 24-h urine and an additional sample, after nocturnal fasting, collected on the day they brought the 24-h sample at the lab. Two different methods (test strip and digital meter) were used to determine pH values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The pH analysis using strips in the 24-h urine presented a mean value similar to the one obtained in the fasting sample (6.07 ± 0.74 vs. 6.02 ± 0.82, respectively; P > 0.05). The same behavior was seen considering the readings with a digital pH meter (5.8 ± 0.78 vs. 5.75 ± 0.83; P > 0.05). However, readings conducted in the same specimen with pH meter and test strip were dissonant (P < 0.05), suggesting that the colorimetric method is not reliable in the assessment of urinary pH in this population.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>pH assessment in a random urinary specimen proved as efficient as the 24-h urine standard method to monitor patients with kidney stones in the use of potassium citrate. Classical test strip analysis is not sensitive enough to evaluate the urine pH in this population and digital pH meter reading is preferred.</p>","PeriodicalId":7438,"journal":{"name":"American journal of clinical and experimental urology","volume":"10 3","pages":"188-193"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9301065/pdf/ajceu0010-0188.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of clinical and experimental urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the correlation between the pH readings in 24-h urine and the random fasting specimen in patients with urolithiasis using 2 methods.

Methods: A total of 114 patients with urinary lithiasis using potassium citrate were prospectively analyzed. All patients collected 24-h urine and an additional sample, after nocturnal fasting, collected on the day they brought the 24-h sample at the lab. Two different methods (test strip and digital meter) were used to determine pH values.

Results: The pH analysis using strips in the 24-h urine presented a mean value similar to the one obtained in the fasting sample (6.07 ± 0.74 vs. 6.02 ± 0.82, respectively; P > 0.05). The same behavior was seen considering the readings with a digital pH meter (5.8 ± 0.78 vs. 5.75 ± 0.83; P > 0.05). However, readings conducted in the same specimen with pH meter and test strip were dissonant (P < 0.05), suggesting that the colorimetric method is not reliable in the assessment of urinary pH in this population.

Conclusion: pH assessment in a random urinary specimen proved as efficient as the 24-h urine standard method to monitor patients with kidney stones in the use of potassium citrate. Classical test strip analysis is not sensitive enough to evaluate the urine pH in this population and digital pH meter reading is preferred.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用柠檬酸钾治疗尿石症患者的禁食和24小时尿液pH值。
目的:采用两种方法评价尿石症患者24小时尿液pH值与随机空腹标本的相关性。方法:对114例应用柠檬酸钾治疗的尿石症患者进行前瞻性分析。所有患者在夜间禁食后收集24小时尿液,并在将24小时样本带到实验室的当天收集额外的样本。两种不同的方法(试纸和数字仪表)测定pH值。结果:24小时尿液pH值与空腹尿液pH值相近(分别为6.07±0.74和6.02±0.82);P > 0.05)。考虑到数字pH计的读数(5.8±0.78 vs. 5.75±0.83;P > 0.05)。然而,在同一标本中,pH计和试纸的读数不一致(P < 0.05),表明比色法在评估该人群尿液pH值时不可靠。结论:随机尿液标本pH值评估与24小时尿标准法监测肾结石患者使用柠檬酸钾的效果相同。经典的试纸分析不够敏感,无法评估该人群的尿液pH值,首选数字pH计读数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
8.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Mendelian randomisation approach to explore genetic factors associated with erectile dysfunction based on pooled genomic data. Administering antibiotic-loaded irrigation fluid as an alternative for prophylactic intravenous antibiotics in transurethral ureterolithotripsy (TUL): a randomized controlled trial. Decreased expression of LncRNA CRYM-AS1 promotes apoptosis through the Hippo-YAP1 signaling pathway leading to diabetic erectile dysfunction. Minimally invasive management of extraperitoneal bladder injury with extension to the trigone of the bladder with bilateral external ureteral catheterization: innovative approach instead of open surgical treatment. N4-acetyl-sulfamethoxazole stone in a patient on chronic trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole therapy: a case report and literature review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1