Analysis of mixed stones is prone to error: A study with US laboratories using micro CT for verification of sample content

Amy Krambeck, James E. Lingeman, James A. McAteer, James Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This project sought to test the ability of commercial stone analysis laboratories to correctly analyze urinary stones. Human stone specimens were cleaved into pieces, and the pieces of each specimen were verified as being similar using micro-computed tomography (micro CT), a non-destructive method. Thus, similar specimens from 25 stones were sent to five laboratories, and a sixth piece was kept for analysis in our laboratory using Fourier- transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR). The results showed that laboratories were very good at analyzing pure specimens, but with mixed specimens the accuracy and consistency varied. In six stones containing apatite, a min eral easily identiied using micro CT, apatite was missed 20% of the time. Struvite content in the specimens was inconsistently reported, with laboratories differing in their reports of the presence of struvite in six of the 25 stones (24%). A mixed stone containing atazanavir was not reported by any of the laboratories as containing that drug. Nomenclature difered among the laboratories, especially with regard to apatite, which was variously reported as hydroxyapatite, carbonate apatite, or as apatite with calcium carbonate. One laboratory reported protein in every stone, while for all others protein was reported in only one stone. We conclude that physicians need to be aware that reports on mixed stones, which represent > 90% of all calculi, can be erroneous. It is likely that supplying a greater amount of stone material will assist a laboratory in making a correct analysis of mixed stones. Also, standardization of nomenclature could assist in analysis reproducibility, but this remains to be tested.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)469-475
Number of pages7
JournalUrological Research
Volume38
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2010

Fingerprint

Tomography
Apatites
Terminology
Urinary Calculi
Calcium Carbonate
Calculi
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy
Durapatite
Proteins
Physicians
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • Calculi
  • Infrared spectrophotometry
  • Stone composition
  • Urolithiasis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Analysis of mixed stones is prone to error : A study with US laboratories using micro CT for verification of sample content. / Krambeck, Amy; Lingeman, James E.; McAteer, James A.; Williams, James.

In: Urological Research, Vol. 38, No. 6, 12.2010, p. 469-475.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ced2aef6b8a84746afd3eac7b79be8d5,
title = "Analysis of mixed stones is prone to error: A study with US laboratories using micro CT for verification of sample content",
abstract = "This project sought to test the ability of commercial stone analysis laboratories to correctly analyze urinary stones. Human stone specimens were cleaved into pieces, and the pieces of each specimen were verified as being similar using micro-computed tomography (micro CT), a non-destructive method. Thus, similar specimens from 25 stones were sent to five laboratories, and a sixth piece was kept for analysis in our laboratory using Fourier- transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR). The results showed that laboratories were very good at analyzing pure specimens, but with mixed specimens the accuracy and consistency varied. In six stones containing apatite, a min eral easily identiied using micro CT, apatite was missed 20{\%} of the time. Struvite content in the specimens was inconsistently reported, with laboratories differing in their reports of the presence of struvite in six of the 25 stones (24{\%}). A mixed stone containing atazanavir was not reported by any of the laboratories as containing that drug. Nomenclature difered among the laboratories, especially with regard to apatite, which was variously reported as hydroxyapatite, carbonate apatite, or as apatite with calcium carbonate. One laboratory reported protein in every stone, while for all others protein was reported in only one stone. We conclude that physicians need to be aware that reports on mixed stones, which represent > 90{\%} of all calculi, can be erroneous. It is likely that supplying a greater amount of stone material will assist a laboratory in making a correct analysis of mixed stones. Also, standardization of nomenclature could assist in analysis reproducibility, but this remains to be tested.",
keywords = "Calculi, Infrared spectrophotometry, Stone composition, Urolithiasis",
author = "Amy Krambeck and Lingeman, {James E.} and McAteer, {James A.} and James Williams",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s00240-010-0317-y",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "469--475",
journal = "Urolithiasis",
issn = "2194-7228",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of mixed stones is prone to error

T2 - A study with US laboratories using micro CT for verification of sample content

AU - Krambeck, Amy

AU - Lingeman, James E.

AU - McAteer, James A.

AU - Williams, James

PY - 2010/12

Y1 - 2010/12

N2 - This project sought to test the ability of commercial stone analysis laboratories to correctly analyze urinary stones. Human stone specimens were cleaved into pieces, and the pieces of each specimen were verified as being similar using micro-computed tomography (micro CT), a non-destructive method. Thus, similar specimens from 25 stones were sent to five laboratories, and a sixth piece was kept for analysis in our laboratory using Fourier- transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR). The results showed that laboratories were very good at analyzing pure specimens, but with mixed specimens the accuracy and consistency varied. In six stones containing apatite, a min eral easily identiied using micro CT, apatite was missed 20% of the time. Struvite content in the specimens was inconsistently reported, with laboratories differing in their reports of the presence of struvite in six of the 25 stones (24%). A mixed stone containing atazanavir was not reported by any of the laboratories as containing that drug. Nomenclature difered among the laboratories, especially with regard to apatite, which was variously reported as hydroxyapatite, carbonate apatite, or as apatite with calcium carbonate. One laboratory reported protein in every stone, while for all others protein was reported in only one stone. We conclude that physicians need to be aware that reports on mixed stones, which represent > 90% of all calculi, can be erroneous. It is likely that supplying a greater amount of stone material will assist a laboratory in making a correct analysis of mixed stones. Also, standardization of nomenclature could assist in analysis reproducibility, but this remains to be tested.

AB - This project sought to test the ability of commercial stone analysis laboratories to correctly analyze urinary stones. Human stone specimens were cleaved into pieces, and the pieces of each specimen were verified as being similar using micro-computed tomography (micro CT), a non-destructive method. Thus, similar specimens from 25 stones were sent to five laboratories, and a sixth piece was kept for analysis in our laboratory using Fourier- transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR). The results showed that laboratories were very good at analyzing pure specimens, but with mixed specimens the accuracy and consistency varied. In six stones containing apatite, a min eral easily identiied using micro CT, apatite was missed 20% of the time. Struvite content in the specimens was inconsistently reported, with laboratories differing in their reports of the presence of struvite in six of the 25 stones (24%). A mixed stone containing atazanavir was not reported by any of the laboratories as containing that drug. Nomenclature difered among the laboratories, especially with regard to apatite, which was variously reported as hydroxyapatite, carbonate apatite, or as apatite with calcium carbonate. One laboratory reported protein in every stone, while for all others protein was reported in only one stone. We conclude that physicians need to be aware that reports on mixed stones, which represent > 90% of all calculi, can be erroneous. It is likely that supplying a greater amount of stone material will assist a laboratory in making a correct analysis of mixed stones. Also, standardization of nomenclature could assist in analysis reproducibility, but this remains to be tested.

KW - Calculi

KW - Infrared spectrophotometry

KW - Stone composition

KW - Urolithiasis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78651315301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78651315301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00240-010-0317-y

DO - 10.1007/s00240-010-0317-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 20967439

AN - SCOPUS:78651315301

VL - 38

SP - 469

EP - 475

JO - Urolithiasis

JF - Urolithiasis

SN - 2194-7228

IS - 6

ER -