مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

video

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

sound

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Version

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

View:

216
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Download:

107
مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

The Agreement Between Current Stone Analysis Techniques and SEM-EDAX in Urolithiasis

Pages

  6-11

Abstract

 Purpose: Nowadays, there are many physical and chemical methods available for urinary stone analysis. According to the latest guidelines, infrared spectroscopy (IR) or x-ray diffraction (XRD) are the two preferred methods in this issue. Therefore, we decided to do a practical comparison between the two above-mentioned techniques with a reference method in order to set up a proper analysis method in our clinical laboratories. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 kidney stones were obtained at Labbafinejad hospital through open surgery or percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Then stone analysis techniques included both a morphological examination by SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) and internal structure analysis by EDAX (Elemental distribution analysis X-ray), XRD, IR and wet chemical analysis. SEM together with EDAX (SEM-EDAX) was considered as reference methods. Results: The results of XRD had the highest agreement with SEM-EDAX analysis (93%), while the total agreement of FTIR and wet chemical analysis was 81% and 71% respectively. The agreement of FTIR for calcium oxalate stones was acceptable (90%), but for uric acid and cystine stones was challenging (65% and 76% respectively). Conclusion: Our results revealed that XRD is more reliable than FTIR; but considering cost issues, FTIR is more suitable for routine clinical laboratory. Moreover, wet chemical analysis, which is routinely used in our laboratories is insufficient for stone analysis and it is mandatory to be replaced by techniques that are more accurate.

Multimedia

  • No record.

    • Cites

  • No record.

    • References

  • No record.

    • Cite

    APA: Copy

    TAHERI, MARYAM, BASIRI, ABBAS, TAHERI, FATEMEH, KHOSHDEL, ALI REZA, Fallah, Mohammad Ali, & Pur nourbakhsh, Faranak. (2019). The Agreement Between Current Stone Analysis Techniques and SEM-EDAX in Urolithiasis. UROLOGY JOURNAL, 16(1), 6-11. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/271277/en

    Vancouver: Copy

    TAHERI MARYAM, BASIRI ABBAS, TAHERI FATEMEH, KHOSHDEL ALI REZA, Fallah Mohammad Ali, Pur nourbakhsh Faranak. The Agreement Between Current Stone Analysis Techniques and SEM-EDAX in Urolithiasis. UROLOGY JOURNAL[Internet]. 2019;16(1):6-11. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/271277/en

    IEEE: Copy

    MARYAM TAHERI, ABBAS BASIRI, FATEMEH TAHERI, ALI REZA KHOSHDEL, Mohammad Ali Fallah, and Faranak Pur nourbakhsh, “The Agreement Between Current Stone Analysis Techniques and SEM-EDAX in Urolithiasis,” UROLOGY JOURNAL, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 6–11, 2019, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/271277/en

    Related Journal Papers

  • No record.

    • Related Seminar Papers

  • No record.

    • Related Plans

  • No record.

    • Recommended Workshops






    Move to top
    telegram sharing button
    whatsapp sharing button
    linkedin sharing button
    twitter sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    email sharing button
    sharethis sharing button