Medical Expulsive Therapy: Worthwhile or Wishful Thinking

Alpha-blockers: the magic pill for endourology-The great delusion

PURPOSE

The present paper takes a different and more critical look at the role of alpha-blockers, sometimes nicknamed as "magical pills", in particular for stone disease and medical expulsive therapy (MET).

METHODS

A non-systematic narrative review was performed, synthesizing pertinent information from selected articles, and critically evaluating their conclusions. Sometimes different views on alpha-blockers were laid bare, including curiosities or other entertaining nuances suitable to the present topic, but always maintaining sharp objectivity and the foremost scientific rigor.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Alpha-blockers seem to be a panacea, being used to treat a wide variety of non-urological diseases and conditions. Urological applications include erectile dysfunction to benign prostatic hyperplasia, from incontinence to urinary retention, or even to facilitate urinary stone passage along the urinary tract. Due to its versatility, alpha-blockers appear to be the Swiss army knife of urological medications. However, the efficacy of alpha-blockers for MET, pain management, or facilitating upper tract access is very disappointing, bringing no, or in some instances, only marginal benefits. Their treatment results are far from being significant or impressive let alone magical. Regular sexual intercourse is an effective alternative to alpha-blockers, providing faster ureteral stone expulsion rates and reducing the need for pain medication. Most of the research supporting alpha-blockers has been based on single-center, underpowered, low-quality studies. These low-quality studies biased several subsequent meta-analyses, contaminating them with their low-quality data, enhancing and prolonging this delusion. These results emphasize the need for large, multi-centric, unbiased, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials to prevent future year-long delusions that may afflict any medical field.

Beyond medical expulsive therapy: evolution to supported stone passage for ureteric stones

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of removing tamsulosin from standardized ureteric stone clinical protocols on rate of stone surgery.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, comparison of all patients with unilateral, <1 cm ureteric stones presenting to a stone clinic after discharge from the emergency department during consecutive years. In the initial year, patients were initially offered medical expulsive therapy (MET) with tamsulosin. In the subsequent year, the protocol was modified to focus on symptom control without tamsulosin; this was termed 'supported stone passage' (SSP). The primary outcome was rate of stone surgery within 90 days of the initial clinic encounter.

RESULTS

Among 723 patients (360 MET, 363 SSP), the rate of attempted stone passage increased from 65% to 74%, between the initial and the subsequent year (P < 0.016). Tamsulosin prescription in patients to attempting stone passage decreased from 84% to 13% (P < 0.001). In patients attempting stone passage, the rate of stone surgery was 26% in the METand 19% in the SSP group (P = 0.066). The overall surgery rate decreased from 51% in the MET group to 40% in the SSP group (P = 0.003). Multivariable analysis, controlling for age, sex and stone burden, did not demonstrate a difference in either rate of attempting to pass stones or in rate of failure of passage according to care protocol. We were unable to demonstrate an independent effect of tamsulosin on failure of passage. Overall, surgical intervention was less likely in the SSP phase than in the MET phase, with an odds ratio of 0.64 (confidence interval) 0.44-0.91; P = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Removing tamsulosin from clinical protocols did not impair stone passage in patients attempting to pass stones.