1
|
Sharma G, Kaundal P, Pareek T, Tyagi S, Sharma AP, Devana SK, Singh SK. Comparison of efficacy of various drugs used for medical expulsive therapy for distal ureter stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pract 2021; 75:e14214. [PMID: 33825273 DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.14214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Medical expulsive therapy has been found to be effective for distal ureteric stones; however, which drug is most efficacious in terms of stone expulsion rate (SER) and stone expulsion time (SET) is not known. With this review we aimed to compare the efficacy of various drug treatments for distal ureter stones used as medical expulsive therapy in terms of SER and SET. METHODS Systematic literature search was conducted to include all the randomised study comparing various drug interventions for lower ureter stones. Standard preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis for network meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) were pursued. RESULTS In this review, 50 randomised studies with 12,382 patients were included. For stone expulsion rate (SER), compared with placebo all the treatment groups were more effective except nifedipine and sildenafil. According to the SUCRA values obtained, naftopidil plus steroid was the highest rank and nifedipine lowest. For stone expulsion time (SET), compared with placebo only tadalafil plus silodosin, nifedipine plus steroid, alfuzosin, silodosin, tadalafil and tamsulosin were more effective. SUCRA values were highest for tadalafil plus silodosin and least for naftopidil plus steroid. From subgroup analysis with individual drugs for SER, SUCRA values were highest for naftopidil followed by silodosin and SET was highest for silodosin and least for naftopidil. CONCLUSION For lower ureter stone, tadalafil plus silodosin is the best combination and silodosin best individual drug considering the SET and SER. Nifedipine as monotherapy is no more effective than control group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gopal Sharma
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Pawan Kaundal
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Tarun Pareek
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Shantanu Tyagi
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Aditya P Sharma
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Sudheer K Devana
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Shrawan K Singh
- Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sahin MO, Sen V, Ongun S, Irer B, Yildiz G. Comparison of the efficacy of silodosin and a terpene combination in the medical expulsive therapy of distal ureteral stones. Int J Clin Pract 2021; 75:e13866. [PMID: 33236480 DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.13866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/07/2020] [Accepted: 11/20/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We aimed to compare the efficacy of silodosin and a terpene combination in the treatment of distal ureteral stones. METHODOLOGY The data of the patients admitted to the urology policlinic with renal colic, diagnosed with distal ureteral stones, and followed up with medical expulsive therapy between December 2017 and June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 comprised 72 patients that received 8 mg/day silodosin and Group 2 consisted of 51 patients that were given three capsules of a terpene combination daily. The groups were compared in terms of the patients' demographic characteristics, medical history, localisation of the present stone, renal collecting system status, daily fluid intake, number of emergency service visits, number of additional analgesic applications needed, number of pain attacks, number of days off work, stone expulsion rate and time to stone expulsion. RESULTS Of the total 123 patients, 98 (79.7%) were stone-free. The stone-free rate was 75.0% in Group 1 and 86.3% in Group 2, with no statistical difference between the two groups. However, the number of visits to the emergency service because of pain, number of additional analgesic applications required, number of days off work, and time to stone expulsion were statistically significantly lower in Group 2 than in Group 1. CONCLUSIONS The treatment of distal ureteral stones with silodosin is as effective as the terpene combination. However, the terpene combination is more effective than silodosin in managing pain and accelerating stone expulsion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Volkan Sen
- Department of Urology, Manisa State Hospital, Manisa, Turkey
| | - Sakir Ongun
- Department of Urology, Balikesir University School of Medicine, Balikesir, Turkey
| | - Bora Irer
- Department of Urology, Izmir Metropolitan Municipality Esrefpasa Hospital, Izmir, Turkey
| | - Guner Yildiz
- Department of Urology, Dr Suat Seren Chest Diseases and Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sharma G, Pareek T, Kaundal P, Tyagi S, Singh S, Yashaswi T, Devan SK, Sharma AP. Comparison of efficacy of three commonly used alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureter stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Int Braz J Urol 2021; 48:742-759. [PMID: 34003612 PMCID: PMC9388169 DOI: 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2020.0548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2020] [Accepted: 08/20/2020] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: The efficacy of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy (MET) is well established. However, it is not known which of the three most commonly used alpha-blockers (tamsulosin, alfuzosin and silodosin) is the most efficacious. With this study we aimed to assess the efficacy of the three commonly used alpha-blockers as MET for distal ureter stones. Materials and Methods: For this review, we searched multiple databases such as PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, OviD SP, CINAHL, and web of science to identify all the relevant randomized studies comparing the efficacy of tamsulosin, alfuzosin, and silodosin. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews for network meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) were followed while conducting this review and the study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020175706). Results: In this review, 31 studies with 7077 patients were included. Compared to placebo all the treatment groups were more effective for both stone expulsion rate (SER) and stone expulsion time (SET). For both SER and SET, silodosin had the highest SUCRA (94.8 and 90.4) values followed by alfuzosin (58.8 and 64.9) and tamsulosin (46.2 and 44.5). The incidence of postural hypotension was similar with all the drugs, whereas, the incidence of retrograde ejaculation was significantly higher for silodosin. Overall confidence for each comparison group in this review ranged from “very low” to “moderate” according to the CINeMA approach. Conclusion: Among the three commonly used alpha-blockers silodosin is the most efficacious drug as MET for lower ureter stones followed by alfuzosin and tamsulosin.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gopal Sharma
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Tarun Pareek
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Pawan Kaundal
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Shantanu Tyagi
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Saket Singh
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Thummala Yashaswi
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Sudheer Kumar Devan
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| | - Aditya Prakash Sharma
- Department of Urology, Advanced Urology Centre, Level II, B-Block, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
What Is the Role of α-Blockers for Medical Expulsive Therapy? Results From a Meta-analysis of 60 Randomized Trials and Over 9500 Patients. Urology 2018; 119:5-16. [DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.03.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2018] [Revised: 03/16/2018] [Accepted: 03/22/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|
5
|
Campschroer T, Zhu X, Vernooij RW, Lock TM. α-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones: a Cochrane systematic review. BJU Int 2018; 122:932-945. [DOI: 10.1111/bju.14454] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Campschroer
- Department of Urology; Rijnstate Hospital Arnhem; Arnhem The Netherlands
| | - Xiaoye Zhu
- Department of Urology; University Medical Center Utrecht; Utrecht The Netherlands
| | - Robin W.M. Vernooij
- Department of Research; Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL); Utrecht The Netherlands
| | - Tycho M.T.W. Lock
- Department of Urology; University Medical Center Utrecht; Utrecht The Netherlands
- Department of Urology; Central Military Hospital; Utrecht The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Yallappa S, Amer T, Jones P, Greco F, Tailly T, Somani BK, Umez-Eronini N, Aboumarzouk OM. Natural History of Conservatively Managed Ureteral Stones: Analysis of 6600 Patients. J Endourol 2018; 32:371-379. [DOI: 10.1089/end.2017.0848] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Sachin Yallappa
- Glasgow Urological Research Unit, Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | - Tarik Amer
- Glasgow Urological Research Unit, Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | - Patrick Jones
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Francesco Greco
- Department of Urology, EAU Young Academic Urologists Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas Tailly
- Department of Urology, EAU Young Academic Urologists Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Bhaskar K. Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom
- Department of Urology, EAU Young Academic Urologists Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands
| | - Nkem Umez-Eronini
- Glasgow Urological Research Unit, Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | - Omar M. Aboumarzouk
- Glasgow Urological Research Unit, Department of Urology, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, United Kingdom
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
- Department of Urology, EAU Young Academic Urologists Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands
- Department of Urology, Islamic Universities of Gaza, College of Medicine, Gaza, Palestine
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Campschroer T, Zhu X, Vernooij RWM, Lock MTWT. Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 4:CD008509. [PMID: 29620795 PMCID: PMC6494465 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008509.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ureteral colic is a common reason for patients to seek medical care. Alpha-blockers are commonly used to improve stone passage through so-called medical expulsive therapy (MET), but their effectiveness remains controversial. This is an update of a 2014 Cochrane review; since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant. OBJECTIVES To assess effects of alpha-blockers compared with standard therapy for ureteral stones 1 cm or smaller confirmed by imaging in adult patients presenting with symptoms of ureteral stone disease. SEARCH METHODS On 18 November 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, and Embase. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO Portal/ICTRP to identify all published/unpublished and ongoing trials. We checked all references of included and review articles and conference proceedings for articles relevant to this review. We sent letters to investigators to request information about unpublished or incomplete studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We included RCTs of ureteral stone passage in adult patients that compared alpha-blockers versus standard therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors screened studies for inclusion and extracted data using standard methodological procedures. We performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were stone clearance and major adverse events; secondary outcomes were stone expulsion time, number of pain episodes, use of diclofenac, hospitalisation, and surgical intervention. We assessed the quality of evidence on a per-outcome basis using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS We included 67 studies with 10,509 participants overall. Of these, 15 studies with 5787 participants used a placebo.Stone clearance: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may result in a large increase in stone clearance (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 1.55; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that the likely effect is probably smaller (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 116 more (95% CI 51 more to 182 more) stone clearances per 1000 participants.Major adverse events: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may have little effect on major adverse events (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.96; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that alpha-blockers likely increase the risk of major adverse events slightly (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.86), corresponding to 29 more (95% CI 3 more to 75 more) major adverse events per 1000 participants.Patients treated with alpha-blockers may experience shorter stone expulsion times (mean difference (MD) -3.40 days, 95% CI -4.17 to -2.63; low-quality evidence), may use less diclofenac (MD -82.41, 95% CI -122.51 to -42.31; low-quality evidence), and likely require fewer hospitalisations (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 69 fewer hospitalisations (95% CI 93 fewer to 32 fewer) per 1000 participants. Meanwhile, the need for surgical intervention appears similar (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; low-quality evidence), corresponding to 28 fewer surgical interventions (95% CI 51 fewer to 2 more) per 1000 participants.A predefined subgroup analysis (test for subgroup differences; P = 0.002) suggests that effects of alpha-blockers may vary with stone size, with RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.15; P = 0.16; I² = 62%) for stones 5 mm or smaller versus 1.45 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.72; P < 0.0001; I² = 59%) for stones larger than 5 mm. We found no evidence suggesting possible subgroup effects based on stone location or alpha-blocker type. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS For patients with ureteral stones, alpha-blockers likely increase stone clearance but probably also slightly increase the risk of major adverse events. Subgroup analyses suggest that alpha-blockers may be less effective for smaller (5 mm or smaller) than for larger stones (greater than 5 mm).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Campschroer
- Radboud University Nijmegen Medical CenterDepartment of UrologyGeert Grooteplein Zuid 10NijmegenGelderlandNetherlands6525 GA
| | - Xiaoye Zhu
- University Medical Center UtrechtDepartment of UrologyUtrechtNetherlands
| | - Robin WM Vernooij
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL)Department of ResearchGodebaldkwartier 419UtrechtNetherlands3511 DT
| | - MTW Tycho Lock
- University Medical Center UtrechtDepartment of UrologyUtrechtNetherlands
- Central Military HospitalDepartment of UrologyUtrechtNetherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Medical Expulsive Therapy in Urolithiasis: A Review of the Quality of the Current Evidence. Eur Urol Focus 2017; 3:27-45. [DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2017.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2017] [Revised: 04/10/2017] [Accepted: 05/02/2017] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
|
9
|
Raison N, Ahmed K, Brunckhorst O, Dasgupta P. Alpha blockers in the management of ureteric lithiasis: A meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pract 2017; 71. [PMID: 28097758 DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12917] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2016] [Accepted: 11/08/2016] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Effective medical expulsion for ureteric stones with α-blockers offers numerous advantages over surgical alternatives. However, its effectiveness remains uncertain and with the publication of new trial data, the available evidence requires reappraisal. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of α-blockers the management of ureteric lithiasis. METHODS A systematic review of the literature, with predefined search criteria, was conducted using PubMed and Embase. All randomised trials comparing α-blocker monotherapy to placebo or standard therapy were included. Stone expulsion rate was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were time to stone expulsion, analgesic usage and pain scores. Subgroup analyses assessed individual adrenergic antagonists and variations in standard therapy. Sensitivity analysis was based on stone location, stone size, Cochrane Risk of Bias score and study protocol. Summary effects were calculated using a random-effect model and presented as Relative risks (RR) and mean differences (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcome measures, respectively. RESULTS Sixty-seven studies randomising 6654 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Stone expulsion rates improved with α-blockers (RR, 1.49; 95% CI 1.38-1.61). Contrast enhanced funnel showed evidence of publication bias. Stone expulsion time was 3.99 days (CI -4.75 to -3.23) shorter with α-blockers. Similarly, patients required 106.53 mg [CI -148.20 to -64.86] less diclofenac compared with control/placebo, and had 0.80 [CI -1.07 to -0.54] fewer pain episodes. Visual Analogue Scores were also reduced, -2.43 [CI -3.87 to -0.99]. All formulations of α-antagonists all demonstrated beneficial effects over conservative treatment/placebo. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated significant effects of stone location, stone size and study design. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Despite the opposing results of recently published trial, current evidence continues to demonstrate a potential benefit of α-blocker treatment particularly for distal stones over 5 mm.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas Raison
- MRC Centre for Transplantation, Division of Transplantation Immunology & Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Kamran Ahmed
- MRC Centre for Transplantation, Division of Transplantation Immunology & Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| | - Oliver Brunckhorst
- GKT School Of Medical Education, King's College London, The Strand, London, UK
| | - Prokar Dasgupta
- MRC Centre for Transplantation, Division of Transplantation Immunology & Mucosal Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Tamsulosin for urolithiasis: a review of the recent literature and current controversies. Am J Emerg Med 2016; 34:2217-2221. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.09.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2016] [Revised: 09/06/2016] [Accepted: 09/06/2016] [Indexed: 01/18/2023] Open
|
11
|
Furyk JS, Chu K, Banks C, Greenslade J, Keijzers G, Thom O, Torpie T, Dux C, Narula R. Distal Ureteric Stones and Tamsulosin: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized, Multicenter Trial. Ann Emerg Med 2016. [DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 90] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
12
|
York NE, Borofsky MS, Lingeman JE. Risks associated with drug treatments for kidney stones. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2015; 14:1865-77. [PMID: 26600291 DOI: 10.1517/14740338.2015.1100604] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/16/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Renal stones are one of the most painful medical conditions patients experience. For many they are also a recurrent problem. Fortunately, there are a number of drug therapies available to treat symptoms as well as prevent future stone formation. AREAS COVERED Herein, we review the most common drugs used in the treatment of renal stones, explaining the mechanism of action and potential side effects. Search of the Medline databases and relevant textbooks was conducted to obtain the relevant information. Further details were sourced from drug prescribing manuals. Recent studies of drug effectiveness are included as appropriate. EXPERT OPINION Recent controversies include medical expulsive therapy trials and complex role of urinary citrate in stone disease. Future directions in research will involve new medical therapies for stone prevention, for example new drugs for hyperoxaluria.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nadya E York
- a Department of Urology , Indiana University School of Medicine , 1801 North Senate Blvd., Suite 220, Indianapolis , IN 46202 , USA
| | - Michael S Borofsky
- a Department of Urology , Indiana University School of Medicine , 1801 North Senate Blvd., Suite 220, Indianapolis , IN 46202 , USA
| | - James E Lingeman
- a Department of Urology , Indiana University School of Medicine , 1801 North Senate Blvd., Suite 220, Indianapolis , IN 46202 , USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Eficacia y seguridad de tamsulosina para el tratamiento conservador del cólico nefrítico: revisión sistemática con metaanálisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados. Med Clin (Barc) 2015; 145:239-47. [DOI: 10.1016/j.medcli.2015.01.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2014] [Revised: 01/26/2015] [Accepted: 01/29/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
14
|
Campschroer T, Zhu Y, Duijvesz D, Grobbee DE, Lock MTWT. Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014:CD008509. [PMID: 24691989 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd008509.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Urinary stone disease is one of the most common reasons for patients visiting a urology practice, affecting about 5% to 10% of the population. Annual costs for stone disease have rapidly increased over the years and most patients with ureteral colic or other symptoms seek medical care. Stone size and location are important predictors of stone passage. In most cases medical expulsive therapy is an appropriate treatment modality and most studies have been performed with alpha-blockers. Alpha-blockers tend to decrease intra-ureteral pressure and increase fluid passage which might increase stone passage. Faster stone expulsion will decrease the rate of complications, the need for invasive interventions and eventually decrease healthcare costs. A study on the effect of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy in ureteral stones is therefore warranted. OBJECTIVES This review aimed to answer the following question: does medical treatment with alpha-blockers compared to other pharmacotherapy or placebo impact on stone clearance rate, in adult patients presenting with symptoms of ureteral stones less than 10 mm confirmed by imaging? Other clinically relevant outcomes such as stone expulsion time, hospitalisation, pain scores, analgesic use and adverse effects have also been explored. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 9 July 2012 through contact with the Trials Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, handsearching conference proceedings, and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), comparing alpha-blockers with other pharmacotherapy or placebo on ureteral stone passage in adult patients were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Reporting bias was investigated using funnel plots. Subgroup analysis was used to explore possible sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was performed removing studies of poor methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS Thirty-two studies (5864 participants) were included. The stone-free rates were significantly higher in the alpha-blocker group (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.64) when compared to standard therapy. Stone expulsion time was 2.91 days shorter with the use of alpha-blockers (MD -2.91, 95% CI -4.00 to -1.81). Use of alpha-blockers reduced the number of pain episodes (MD -0.48, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.01), the need for analgesic medication (diclofenac) (MD -38.17 mg, 95% CI -74.93 to -1.41) and hospitalisation (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.97). Patients using alpha-blockers were more likely to experience adverse effects when compared to standard therapy (RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.38 to 5.45) or placebo (RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.50 to 4.96). Most adverse effects were mild of origin and did not lead to cessation of therapy, and several studies reported no adverse events in either the treatment or control group.In 7/32 studies patients and doctors were both blinded. In the other studies blinding was not described in the methods or no blinding had taken place. Two studies described incomplete data and only one study showed a relatively high number of patients who withdrew from the study. These factors limited the methodological strength of the evidence found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The use of alpha-blockers in patients with ureteral stones results in a higher stone-free rate and a shorter time to stone expulsion. Alpha-blockers should therefore be offered as part of medical expulsive therapy as one of the primary treatment modalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Campschroer
- Department of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, PO Box C04.236, Utrecht, Netherlands, 3584 CX
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Terpene compound drug as medical expulsive therapy for ureterolithiasis: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 2013; 41:143-51. [DOI: 10.1007/s00240-012-0538-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2012] [Accepted: 12/18/2012] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
16
|
Fan B, Yang D, Wang J, Che X, Li X, Wang L, Chen F, Wang T, Song X. Can tamsulosin facilitate expulsion of ureteral stones? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Urol 2012; 20:818-30. [PMID: 23278872 DOI: 10.1111/iju.12048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2012] [Accepted: 11/15/2012] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy and safety of the adrenergic alpha-antagonist tamsulosin in facilitating ureteral stones expulsion. METHODS A literature search was carried out using the PubMed database, Medline via Ovid, Embase and the Cochrane Library database to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficiency of tamsulosin in the treatment of ureteral stones. Meta-analysis and forest plots were carried out by use of Review Manager version 5.1 software (Cochrane Collaboration). RESULTS Compared with the control group, the tamsulosin group had an increase in expulsion rate of 51% and a decrease in expulsion time of 2.63 days. Furthermore, tamsulosin was found to reduce the risk of ureteral colic during treatment by 40% and also the risk of requirement of auxiliary procedures during follow up by 60%. In terms of safety, the tamsulosin group had a 117% increase in the incidence of side-effects compared with the control group, especially for incidence of dizziness. CONCLUSION Tamsulosin facilitates the expulsion of ureteral calculi by providing a higher expulsion rate, a shorter expulsion time, a lower incidence of ureteral colic during treatment and a lower requirement of auxiliary procedures. However, the incidence of dizziness occurring during tamsulosin treatment is significantly higher in this setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bo Fan
- Department of Urology, First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, China
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Yoshida M, Kudoh J, Homma Y, Kawabe K. New clinical evidence of silodosin, an α1A selective adrenoceptor antagonist, in the treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms. Int J Urol 2012; 19:306-16. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02957.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
18
|
Kallidonis P, Liourdi D, Liatsikos E. Medical Treatment for Renal Colic and Stone Expulsion. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2011. [DOI: 10.1016/j.eursup.2011.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|