Talk:Bladder stone
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Bladder stone.
|
The role of benign prostatic hyperplasia
edit[The benign prostatic hyperplasia page] Indicates that bladder stones can occur as a result of that condition. Shouldn't that be mentioned on this page as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.46.118 (talk) 01:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Seems to have been taken care of by now. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 11:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Merge with Nephrolithiasis?
editThis page should be combined with Nephrolithiasis, as it is really not functionally independent, and this page is lacking in both quality and content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.127.204.61 (talk) 20:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
- I am not a medical anything, but methinks that the two concepts are fairly distinct in most respects (causes, symptoms, pathology, treatment, etc.)
As for the contents, a lot has been added recently so that complaint seems to be moot now. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 11:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Greek script
editI removed temporarily the Greek script λιθoς "lihos" for symmetry sake. Let's either have Greek script for both "ouron" and "lihos", or for neither of them. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 11:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Format problems
editI addressed a strange formatting issue that made the page very wide. Some duplicated text and fragments were removed from the Causes section. In addition I revised the wording a bit to make the section more accurate. -- Firedogbme (talk) 08:14, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Requested move
edit- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. I did not look at cleaning up the links since a new article on Urolithiasis would likely be the correct target for many of the existing links. I did not update the template in the article since I don't know what should be changed. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Urolithiasis → Bladder stone –
Ideally, there would be three articles to completely cover the subject of urolithiasis:
- Urolithiasis (parent article): a broad term that refers to stones originating anywhere in the urinary system, including the kidneys and bladder.(Pearle MS, Calhoun EA and Curhan GC (2007). "Chapter 8: Urolithiasis". In Litwin, MS; Saigal, CS (eds.). Urologic Diseases in America (NIH Publication No. 07–5512) (PDF). Bethesda, Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. pp. 283–319. Retrieved 2011-06-01.)
- Kidney stone (daughter article): dealing only with nephrolithiasis (the presence of calculi in the kidneys) and ureterolithiasis (when a calculus or calculi are located in the ureter)
- Bladder stone (daughter article): dealing only with cystolithiasis (stones which form or have passed into the bladder).(McNutt, WF (1893). "Chapter VII: Vesical Calculi (Cysto-lithiasis)". Diseases of the kidneys and bladder: a text-book for students of medicine. Vol. IV: Diseases of the Bladder. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company. pp. 185–6. Retrieved 2011-06-01.)
This particular article covers only bladder stones, while the Kidney stone article covers all the other forms of urolithiasis. What I am suggesting is that this article be re-titled as Bladder stone, and a new (short) article be written, entitled Urolithiasis. I will be happy to write this last article as soon as the namespace becomes available. DiverDave (talk) 23:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Support. Makes sense, if I followed the argument correctly. (It's commendable that you would propose to do it this way rather than a butcher cut-and-paste job like some might be tempted to do.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
How big is huge?
edit"Bladder stones vary in their size, shape and texture- some are small, hard and smooth whereas others are huge, spiked and very soft." How small is "small" and how big is "huge"? Are we talking millimetres? Centimetres? Inches? --RealGrouchy (talk) 04:05, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
-My guess would be inches. I had a 2 inch bladder stone surgically removed a few years back, and my urologist said that it was much larger than any he normally saw (which going from that were likely in the centimeter range).Gerokeymaster (talk) 05:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC)