Inaccurate reporting of mineral composition by commercial stone analysis laboratories: Implications for infection and metabolic stones

Amy E. Krambeck, Naseem F. Khan, Molly E. Jackson, James E. Lingeman, James A. McAteer, James C. Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We determined the accuracy of stone composition analysis at commercial laboratories. Materials and Methods: A total of 25 human renal stones with infrared spectroscopy determined composition were fragmented into aliquots and studied with micro computerized tomography to ensure fragment similarity. Representative fragments of each stone were submitted to 5 commercial stone laboratories for blinded analysis. Results: All laboratories agreed on the composition of 6 pure stones. Only 2 of 4 stones (50%) known to contain struvite were identified as struvite at all laboratories. Struvite was reported as a component by some laboratories for 4 stones previously determined not to contain struvite. Overall there was disagreement regarding struvite in 6 stones (24%). For 9 calcium oxalate stones all laboratories reported some mixture of calcium oxalate but the quantity of subtypes differed significantly among laboratories. In 6 apatite containing stones apatite was missed by the laboratories in 20% of samples. None of the laboratories identified atazanavir in a stone containing that antiviral drug. One laboratory reported protein in every sample while all others reported it in only 1. Nomenclature for apatite differed among laboratories with 1 reporting apatite as carbonate apatite and never hydroxyapatite, another never reporting carbonate apatite and always reporting hydroxyapatite, and a third reporting carbonate apatite as apatite with calcium carbonate. Conclusions: Commercial laboratories reliably recognize pure calculi. However, variability in the reporting of mixed calculi suggests a problem with the accuracy of stone analysis results. There is also a lack of standard nomenclature used by laboratories.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1543-1549
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume184
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2010

Fingerprint

Laboratory Infection
Minerals
Apatites
Calcium Oxalate
Calculi
Durapatite
Terminology
Calcium Carbonate

Keywords

  • analysis
  • diagnostic errors
  • laboratories
  • tomography, x-ray computed
  • urolithiasis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Inaccurate reporting of mineral composition by commercial stone analysis laboratories : Implications for infection and metabolic stones. / Krambeck, Amy E.; Khan, Naseem F.; Jackson, Molly E.; Lingeman, James E.; McAteer, James A.; Williams, James C.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 184, No. 4, 01.10.2010, p. 1543-1549.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Krambeck, Amy E. ; Khan, Naseem F. ; Jackson, Molly E. ; Lingeman, James E. ; McAteer, James A. ; Williams, James C. / Inaccurate reporting of mineral composition by commercial stone analysis laboratories : Implications for infection and metabolic stones. In: Journal of Urology. 2010 ; Vol. 184, No. 4. pp. 1543-1549.
@article{11fd501703de43babf1ca1e256886104,
title = "Inaccurate reporting of mineral composition by commercial stone analysis laboratories: Implications for infection and metabolic stones",
abstract = "Purpose: We determined the accuracy of stone composition analysis at commercial laboratories. Materials and Methods: A total of 25 human renal stones with infrared spectroscopy determined composition were fragmented into aliquots and studied with micro computerized tomography to ensure fragment similarity. Representative fragments of each stone were submitted to 5 commercial stone laboratories for blinded analysis. Results: All laboratories agreed on the composition of 6 pure stones. Only 2 of 4 stones (50{\%}) known to contain struvite were identified as struvite at all laboratories. Struvite was reported as a component by some laboratories for 4 stones previously determined not to contain struvite. Overall there was disagreement regarding struvite in 6 stones (24{\%}). For 9 calcium oxalate stones all laboratories reported some mixture of calcium oxalate but the quantity of subtypes differed significantly among laboratories. In 6 apatite containing stones apatite was missed by the laboratories in 20{\%} of samples. None of the laboratories identified atazanavir in a stone containing that antiviral drug. One laboratory reported protein in every sample while all others reported it in only 1. Nomenclature for apatite differed among laboratories with 1 reporting apatite as carbonate apatite and never hydroxyapatite, another never reporting carbonate apatite and always reporting hydroxyapatite, and a third reporting carbonate apatite as apatite with calcium carbonate. Conclusions: Commercial laboratories reliably recognize pure calculi. However, variability in the reporting of mixed calculi suggests a problem with the accuracy of stone analysis results. There is also a lack of standard nomenclature used by laboratories.",
keywords = "analysis, diagnostic errors, laboratories, tomography, x-ray computed, urolithiasis",
author = "Krambeck, {Amy E.} and Khan, {Naseem F.} and Jackson, {Molly E.} and Lingeman, {James E.} and McAteer, {James A.} and Williams, {James C.}",
year = "2010",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.089",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "184",
pages = "1543--1549",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inaccurate reporting of mineral composition by commercial stone analysis laboratories

T2 - Implications for infection and metabolic stones

AU - Krambeck, Amy E.

AU - Khan, Naseem F.

AU - Jackson, Molly E.

AU - Lingeman, James E.

AU - McAteer, James A.

AU - Williams, James C.

PY - 2010/10/1

Y1 - 2010/10/1

N2 - Purpose: We determined the accuracy of stone composition analysis at commercial laboratories. Materials and Methods: A total of 25 human renal stones with infrared spectroscopy determined composition were fragmented into aliquots and studied with micro computerized tomography to ensure fragment similarity. Representative fragments of each stone were submitted to 5 commercial stone laboratories for blinded analysis. Results: All laboratories agreed on the composition of 6 pure stones. Only 2 of 4 stones (50%) known to contain struvite were identified as struvite at all laboratories. Struvite was reported as a component by some laboratories for 4 stones previously determined not to contain struvite. Overall there was disagreement regarding struvite in 6 stones (24%). For 9 calcium oxalate stones all laboratories reported some mixture of calcium oxalate but the quantity of subtypes differed significantly among laboratories. In 6 apatite containing stones apatite was missed by the laboratories in 20% of samples. None of the laboratories identified atazanavir in a stone containing that antiviral drug. One laboratory reported protein in every sample while all others reported it in only 1. Nomenclature for apatite differed among laboratories with 1 reporting apatite as carbonate apatite and never hydroxyapatite, another never reporting carbonate apatite and always reporting hydroxyapatite, and a third reporting carbonate apatite as apatite with calcium carbonate. Conclusions: Commercial laboratories reliably recognize pure calculi. However, variability in the reporting of mixed calculi suggests a problem with the accuracy of stone analysis results. There is also a lack of standard nomenclature used by laboratories.

AB - Purpose: We determined the accuracy of stone composition analysis at commercial laboratories. Materials and Methods: A total of 25 human renal stones with infrared spectroscopy determined composition were fragmented into aliquots and studied with micro computerized tomography to ensure fragment similarity. Representative fragments of each stone were submitted to 5 commercial stone laboratories for blinded analysis. Results: All laboratories agreed on the composition of 6 pure stones. Only 2 of 4 stones (50%) known to contain struvite were identified as struvite at all laboratories. Struvite was reported as a component by some laboratories for 4 stones previously determined not to contain struvite. Overall there was disagreement regarding struvite in 6 stones (24%). For 9 calcium oxalate stones all laboratories reported some mixture of calcium oxalate but the quantity of subtypes differed significantly among laboratories. In 6 apatite containing stones apatite was missed by the laboratories in 20% of samples. None of the laboratories identified atazanavir in a stone containing that antiviral drug. One laboratory reported protein in every sample while all others reported it in only 1. Nomenclature for apatite differed among laboratories with 1 reporting apatite as carbonate apatite and never hydroxyapatite, another never reporting carbonate apatite and always reporting hydroxyapatite, and a third reporting carbonate apatite as apatite with calcium carbonate. Conclusions: Commercial laboratories reliably recognize pure calculi. However, variability in the reporting of mixed calculi suggests a problem with the accuracy of stone analysis results. There is also a lack of standard nomenclature used by laboratories.

KW - analysis

KW - diagnostic errors

KW - laboratories

KW - tomography, x-ray computed

KW - urolithiasis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78651284604&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78651284604&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.089

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2010.05.089

M3 - Article

C2 - 20728108

AN - SCOPUS:78651284604

VL - 184

SP - 1543

EP - 1549

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 4

ER -