ArticleUrolithiasis2025
The influence and relationship of dysbiosis in the urinary microbiota on patients with urolithiasis.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lactobacillus acidophilus abolishes oxalate-mediated renal epithelial barrier disruption and calcium oxalate monohydrate crystal adhesion to renal epithelial cells.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Dysbiosis of gut and urinary microbiota in urolithiasis patients and post-surgical cases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- The gut-kidney axis in urolithiasis: roles of gut microbiota, metabolites, and therapeutic implications.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urolithiasis is a disease with high prevalence and recurrence rate. There are various risk factors impacting on stone formation including intestinal micorbiota. This study aims to investigate the relationship between urine microbiota with urolithiasis. We collected mid-stream voided urine samples from urolithiasis patients and control participants and stored them in a freezer at - 80 °C. All enrolled participants were requested to provide information about their clinical characteristics. The procedure included the extraction of the genomic DNA from the urine samples; the amplification by polymerase chain reaction (PCR); PCR product quantification, mixing, and purification; DNA library preparation; and sequencing was performed with quality control (QC) measures. Alpha diversity was indicative of the species complexity within individual urine samples, and beta diversity analysis was used to evaluate the differences among the samples in terms of species complexity. We enrolled 28 urolithiasis patients and 59 control participants who reported no recent antibiotic usage. In the beta diversity analysis, there was a significant difference between the microbiota in the samples of the urolithiasis and control groups according to ANOSIM statistical analysis. (P = 0.004). On comparing the groups, it showed Alcaligenes, Bacteroides, Blautia, Ruminococcaceae_UCG, Cutibacterium, Alistipes, Lachnoclostridium present more significant in control group than urolithiasis patients. In conclusion, our current study shows that dysbiosis of urine microbiota may be related to the development of urolithiasis. Further research targeting specific microbes to identify their role in the development of diseases is necessary and might provide novel diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40105975What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.