A systematic review of medical therapy to facilitate passage of ureteral calculi

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of either or both mirabegron and silodosin, as a medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate efficacy and safety of either or both silodosin and mirabegron as MET for distal ureteric stones ≤ 10 mm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study enrolled a total of 105 patients, aged between 20 and 56 years, diagnosed by single radiopaque distal ureteral stone measuring ≤ 10 mm. The recruitment period spanned from May 2020 to December 2021. The patients were randomly divided into three groups, with each group consisting of 35 participants. Group A received a once-daily dose of 8 mg of silodosin, group B received a once-daily dose of 50 mg of mirabegron, and group C received a combination of both medications. Treatment was administered to all patients until the stone was expelled or for a maximum duration of four weeks. The stone-free rate was determined by analyzing KUB films with or without ultrasonography.

RESULTS

The rate of stone expulsion was significantly higher in group C compared to groups A and B (P = 0.04 and P = 0.004, respectively). The mean (standard deviation) time for stone expulsion in groups A, B, and C was 14 ± 2.3 days, 11 ± 3.1 days, and 7 ± 2.2 days, respectively. Group C demonstrated a significantly shorter stone expulsion time compared to groups A and B (P = 0.001 and P = 0.04, respectively). The frequency of renal colic in group C was significantly lower than that in groups A and B, resulting in a reduced requirement for analgesics (P < 0.05). Anejaculation occurred at a significantly higher rate in the silodosin group (73.9%) and combination group (84%) compared to the mirabegron group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that both silodosin and mirabegron are effective treatments for the expulsion of lower ureteric stones. Furthermore, the combination of these medications leads to an increased rate of stone expulsion and a reduced duration of expulsion.

Does mirabegron have a potential role as a medical expulsive therapy in the treatment of distal ureteral stones? A prospective randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

The existence of β3 receptors in the bladder and ureter was documented in many studies on animals and humans, it was documented that relaxation of the lower ureteral segment is achieved by the stimulation of these receptors. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of mirabegron as a medical expulsive therapy (MET) for distal ureteral stones in comparison with silodosin and placebo.

METHODS

One hundred eighty patients with distal ureteral stone of 5-10 mm size were included in our study. They were divided into three groups, and each one consisted of 60 patients. Group I was given silodosin 8 mg, group II mirabegron 50 mg and group III placebo once daily. The treatment was prescribed for all the cases till stone expulsion or a maximum duration of 4 weeks. Primary outcome was the stone expulsion rate (SER). While secondary outcomes were stone expulsion time, side effects of the used drugs, hospital visits number for pain, and amount of analgesic taken.

RESULTS

We found that the SER was significantly higher in silodosin than mirabegron and placebo groups (61%, 38.6%, and 36.7%, respectively) (p = 0.013). Also, the stone expulsion interval was significantly shorter in silodosin than mirabegron and control groups (p < 0.001). While hospital visits number for pain, and amount of analgesic taken were comparable. There was no difference between the studied medications in terms of the adverse effects except for retrograde ejaculation (silodosin = 63.3%, mirabegron = 0%, and placebo = 0%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Mirabegron has no medical expulsive effect. While silodosin improves SER and stone expulsion time. However, retrograde ejaculation was its main side effect and occurred in 63.3% of the male patients. Therefore, more research is needed to discover a more tolerable MET.

Medical Expulsive Therapy for Pediatric Ureteral Stones: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of medical expulsive therapy (MET) for ureteral stones in pediatric patients, Cochrane, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the reference list of retrieved studies were searched up to September 2022 to identify RCTs on the efficacy of MET. The protocol was prospectively registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022339093). Articles were reviewed, data were extracted by two reviewers, and the differences were resolved by the third reviewer. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2. The outcomes, including the stone expulsion rate (SER), stone expulsion time (SET), episode of pain, analgesic consumption, and adverse effects, were evaluated. Six RCTs enrolling 415 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The duration of MET ranged from 19 to 28 days. The investigated medications included tamsulosin, silodosin, and doxazosin. The stone-free rate after 4 weeks in the MET group was 1.42 times that of the control group (RR: 1.42; 95% CI: 1.26-1.61, p < 0.001). The stone expulsion time also decreased by an average of 5.18 days (95% CI: -8.46/-1.89, p = 0.002). Adverse effects were more commonly observed in the MET group (RR: 2.18; 95% CI: 1.28-3.69, p = 0.004). The subgroup analysis evaluating the influence of the type of medication, the stone size, and the age of patients failed to reveal any impact of the aforementioned factors on the stone expulsion rate or stone expulsion time. Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy among pediatric patients are efficient and safe. They increase the stone expulsion rate and decrease the stone expulsion time; however, this included a higher rate of adverse effects, which include headache, dizziness, or nasal congestion.

Meta-analysis of the efficacy and adverse drug reactions of adrenergic alpha-antagonists in treating children with ureteral calculi

This meta-analysis investigated the efficacy and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of three different adrenergic alpha-antagonists during the treatment of pediatric ureteral stones. Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Registry until January 2022. We identified 7 articles, including six RCTs and one cohort study. 610 children received either adrenergic alpha-antagonists or placebo. The results confirmed that the three different adrenergic alpha-antagonists could significantly increase the ureteral calculi expulsive rate and shorten the ureteral calculi expulsive time, regardless of the size of the stone "<5 mm" or "5-10 mm". Subgroup analysis suggested that all three adrenergic alpha-antagonists increased the ureteral calculi expulsive rate. Tamsulosin and silodosin also have the effect of shortening ureteral calculi expulsive time, while doxazosin has an insignificant effect on ureteral calculi expulsive time. Besides, tamsulosin and silodosin obviously reduced the number of pain episodes caused by ureteral calculi in children. We analyzed the treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) caused by the treatment of three different adrenergic alpha-antagonists to explore their ADRs. The probability of ADRs was increased after treatment with adrenergic alpha-antagonists. Further subgroup analysis revealed the application of tamsulosin was positively correlated with ADRs in children with ureteral calculi, while the application of doxazosin and silodosin had no statistically significant effect on the probability of TEAEs. In a conclusion, this article systematically analyzed the efficacy and ADRs of three different adrenergic alpha-antagonists, and provided reference and guidance for the application of adrenergic alpha-antagonists to treat children ureteral calculi.

Factors Affecting the Outcome of Medical Treatment in Cats with Obstructive Ureteral Stones Treated with Tamsulosin: 70 Cases (2018-2022)

Simple Summary

Other than surgical approaches the treatment options for feline ureterolithiasis are limited compared to those of human medicine. After various studies on ureteral muscle relaxation drugs, tamsulosin has been used as a treatment for distal ureteral stones in human medicine. However, the available clinical veterinary data on the efficacy of drugs that relax the ureter are limited. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the factors affecting the outcome of tamsulosin treatment for feline ureterolithiasis. With tamsulosin treatment, the ureteric stone passage was confirmed in 22 out of 70 cats, with a success rate of 31.43%. Negative factors with statistical significance for stone passage in this study were high baseline creatinine levels, female sex, proximal location of stones, and large diameter stones. The results of this study suggest that tamsulosin can be considered for the treatment of ureterolithiasis in cats with small distal ureteral stones. In addition, this study serves as an important reference for determining whether medical treatment of feline ureteral obstruction using tamsulosin can be attempted.

Abstract

The incidence of diseases associated with feline ureteral obstruction is increasing; however, non-surgical treatment options are limited. This study evaluated the outcome of medical treatment in cats with obstructive ureteral stones treated with tamsulosin and identified potential factors predicting spontaneous stone passage. We retrospectively reviewed 70 client-owned cats treated at the Western Referral Animal Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, from 2018 to 2022. All the cats had obstructive ureterolithiasis and were treated using tamsulosin. The baseline characteristics of the cats, stone diameter and location, and stone passage outcomes were analyzed. Stone passage occurred in 22 cats; the remaining 48 cats showed no change in stone locations. Sex, creatinine, and diameter and location of stones were potential risk factors associated with successful stone passage, but age, weight, and side of the stone were not. No serious adverse events related to tamsulosin treatment were observed. This is the first study to identify the risk factors predictive of the spontaneous stone passage of cats with obstructive ureterolithiasis after tamsulosin treatment. Tamsulosin could be an alternative treatment for ureteral obstruction in male cats with smaller distal ureteral stones and low baseline serum creatinine levels. These findings could help develop guidelines for treating feline ureterolithiasis.

Efficacy of Mirabegron as Medical Expulsive Therapy for Distal Ureteral Stones: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Today, medical expulsive therapy (MET) is more effective and commonly used in distal ureteral stones when compared with conservative treatments. Many treatments, namely, alpha-adrenergic blockers and calcium channel blockers, prostaglandin synthesis inhibitors, glyceryl trinitrate, and steroids, have been, therefore, utilized to mitigate such complications and accelerate stone expulsion. Several animal and human studies revealed the presence of β3-receptors in the ureter and bladder, where stimulating these receptors could relax the distal ureteral segment.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of use of mirabegron as MET for distal ureteral stones (intramural and extramural).

METHODS

This is a prospective randomized controlled study including 90 patients who had distal ureteral stones less than 10 mm and were evaluated between January and June 2020. The patients were classified into 3 groups: group (A) 30 patients: mirabegron 50 mg d-1 + diclofenac Na 100 mg tab (to be taken only during colic episodes), group (B) 30 patients: tamsulosin HCL 0.4 mg cap + diclofenac Na 100 mg tab (to be taken only during colic episodes), and group (C) 30 patients: diclofenac Na 100 mg tab only (to be taken only during colic episodes). Age, sex, stone size, laterality, and grade of ureterohydronephrosis were recorded. Patients were observed for 30 days, and ureteroscopy was completed for those with nonexpulsed stones. Follow-up parameters included number of renal colic episodes, duration of medical therapy, stone expulsion time, and stone expulsion rate (SER).

RESULTS

In the group (A), 2 (6.6%) patients were excluded due to nasal congestion, and 1 (3.3%) patient was excluded due to a 20-mm Hg systolic blood pressure increase. Four (13.3%) patients in group (B) were noncompliant on medical treatment. In addition, 2 (6.6%) patients in group (A), 1 (3.3%) patient in group (B), and 5 (16.6%) patients in group (C) who did not attend follow-up examinations were excluded from the study. The SER increased significantly in group (A) and (B) when compared with group (C). The mean time of stone expulsion was about 15, 25, and 12 days for groups A, B, and C, respectively, and there was a significant statistical difference (p value = 0.006) among the 3 groups. The mean number of renal colic episodes of group (A) of patients was 1.8 times, while that of group (B) was 2.6 times and that of group (C) was 2.16 times with no significant statistical difference after comparing the 3 groups (p value = 0.660).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with mirabegron appears to be a safe and effective medical expulsion therapy for distal ureteric stones and is better than tamsulosin.

EFFICACY OF DOXAZOSIN VERSUS TAMSULOSIN IN LOWER URETERIC STONE EXPULSION IN ADULT POPULATION OF DISTRICT DERA ISMAIL KHAN, PAKISTAN

Background: Urolithiasis is the third common disease of the urinary tract after UTIs and pathological diseases of the prostate. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of doxazosin versus tamsulosin in lower ureteric stone expulsion in adult population of District Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan.Materials Methods: This non-randomized control trial was conducted in the Department of Urology, Gomal Medical College, Dera Ismail Khan, Pakistan from February 2020 to December 2020. The 252 patients included in our study were divided in to two groups. The patients in experimental group received Tab. doxazosin 4 mg daily for 4 weeks and Tab. diclofenac sodium 50 mg B.D for 5 days and then on need basis. The patients in control group received Cap. tamsulosin 0.4 mg daily for 4 weeks and similarly Tab. diclofenac sodium 50 mg as in experimental group. All the patients were followed regularly for expulsion of ureteric stones for four weeks. Sex, age and stone size were matching, while stone expulsion was a research variable. Hypothesis was verified by McNemar chi-square test.Results: Out of 252 patients, 113 (89.68%) patients in experimental group, while 77 (61.11%) patients in control group passed the stones. There was statistically significant difference in efficacy in doxazosin group as compared to tamsulosin group (p-value=.0001).Conclusion: The use of doxazosin as the medical expulsion therapy for the lower ureteric stone proved to be more effective as compared to tamsulosin as demonstrated by our results.

EFFICACY OF ALFUZOSIN VERSUS CONTROL GROUP IN UPPER URETERIC STONE EXPULSION IN ADULT POPULATION OF LAHORE, PAKISTAN

Background: Urinary stone disease is one of the commonest urological diseases worldwide. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of alfuzosin versus control group in upper ureteric stone expulsion in adult population of district Lahore, Pakistan.Materials Methods: This trial was conducted in Department of Urology, Sheikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan form January 2017 to June 2017. All adult patients with upper ureteric stone size 5-10 mm were eligible. Those with multiple stones, having fever, severe pain, history of surgery in past two weeks and growth on urine culture or pyuria were excluded. Experimental and control groups each had 30 patients. Experimental group received Tab. alfuzosin 10 mg daily for four weeks and Tab. diclofenac sodium 50 mg SOS for acute pain. The control group received Tab. diclofenac sodium 50 mg SOS for acute pain. We followed all patients for four weeks for expulsion of ureteric stones by X-ray KUB or CT KUB. Sex, age and stone size were matching variables. Stone expulsion (yes, no) was research variable. We compared count of stone expulsion between two groups by using McNemar chi-square test at alpha 0.5 using GraphPad.Results: Out of 30 patients in experimental group, 23 (76.67%) were men and seven (23.33%) women and out of 30 in control group, 20 (66.67%) were men and 10 (33.33%) women, almost similar in both groups. Mean age in experimental group was 39.45±10.33 years and in control group it was 37.38±8.28 years, almost similar in both groups. Mean stone size was 7.45±1.47 (5-10) mm in the experimental and 7.28±1.68 (5-10) mm in control group, being comparable in both the groups. In experimental group, stone expulsion was achieved in 23 (76.67%) cases and not in seven (23.33%) cases and in control group, it was achieved in 16 (53.33%) cases and not in 14 (46.67%) cases. There was statistically no significant difference in efficacy of alfuzosin versus control group (p=.1213).Conclusion: Our study showed no difference in efficacy of alfuzosin versus control group for upper ureteric stone expulsion in adult population of district Lahore, Pakistan.

Mirabegron in medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To observe the efficacy and safety of Mirabegron in patients with distal, ureteral stones ≤ 10 mm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 90 patients with distal ureteral stones ≤ 10 mm were prospectively randomized into two groups. Forty-five cases in the study group and 45 cases as control. The stone-free rates (SFRs) and renal colic episodes between two groups were compared at the 1st, 2nd and 4th week end by imaging examinations.

RESULT

All of 90 patients were randomly assigned to two groups. In patients with ≤ 5 mm stones, the SFRs in the 1st week (63.6% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.040), the 2nd week (86.4% vs. 54.2%, P = 0.018), and the 4th week (90.9% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.046) after treatment were all significantly higher than that in the control group by the stratification analysis of stone size. Even though SFRs were all higher for patients with > 5 mm stones in study group, there was no statistically significant difference (All P > 0.05). In terms of renal colic episodes, the frequency of occurrence of the study group was significantly lower than that of the control group and need less antalgic.

CONCLUSIONS

The MET with Mirabegron has a significant role in improve SFR for the patients with distal ureteral stones ≤ 5 mm and no effect in > 5 mm stones. Furthermore, Mirabegron reduces the need for antalgic in ≤ 10 mm stones with low incidence of adverse effects.

Can serum procalcitonin levels be useful in predicting spontaneous ureteral stone passage?

Background

Medical expulsive therapy (MET) is recommended for ureteral stones when there is no indication for interventional treatment. Spontaneous passage (SP) may not always be perceived in patients undergoing MET. We aimed to demonstrate the effects of inflammatory factors on spontaneous ureteral stone passage in patients undergoing MET.

Methods

Our study was conducted between August and November, 2016, in healthy volunteers and patients with a single distal ureteral stone between 5 and 10 mm in diameter and no indications for interventional therapy. Blood and urine samples from all patients and healthy volunteers were tested. The patients were followed up every 2 weeks for 1 month unless emergency situations appeared. Patients with stone-free status at follow-up were concluded to have achieved complete stone passage [SP(+)], and failure [SP(−)] was concluded if the patient had not passed the stone by the end of the study. Blood samples of the patients and the control group were analyzed, recording WBC (white blood cell), CRP (c-reactive protein), SED (sedimentation), MPV (mean platelet volume), NLR (neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio), and serum procalcitonin levels. Abnormalities in urine samples were recorded. All patients received diclofenac sodium 75 mg/day, tamsulosin 0.4 mg/day, and at least 3 l/day fluid intake. Patients were followed for a month with kidney, ureter, bladder (KUB) plain films, ultrasonography (USG), and unenhanced abdominal CT scans while undergoing MET. Comparative statistical analyses were performed between the SP(+) and SP(−) groups.

Results

The procalcitonin levels of the SP(−) group were significantly higher (207 ± 145.1 pg/ml) than in the SP(+) group (132.7 ± 28.1 pg/ml) (p = 0.000). The leucocyturia rate of the SP(−) group was significantly higher than in the SP(+) group (p = 0.004). Based on the ROC curve analysis, 160 pg/ml (86.7% sensitivity, 70.8% specificity, p < 0.001; AUC: 0.788 95% CI (0.658–0.917) was identified as the optimal cut-off value for procalcitonin. In logistic regression analysis, a significant efficacy of procalcitonin and leucocyturia was observed in the univariate analysis on spontaneous passage. In the multivariate analysis, significant independent activity was observed with procalcitonin. (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that high procalcitonin levels and the presence of leucocyturia have a strong negative effect on SP of ureteral stones between 5 and 10 mm in diameter. This relationship can be explained by stone impaction, possibly caused by increased mucosal inflammation.

Practical help for specifying the target difference in sample size calculations for RCTs: the DELTA2 five-stage study, including a workshop

BACKGROUND

The randomised controlled trial is widely considered to be the gold standard study for comparing the effectiveness of health interventions. Central to its design is a calculation of the number of participants needed (the sample size) for the trial. The sample size is typically calculated by specifying the magnitude of the difference in the primary outcome between the intervention effects for the population of interest. This difference is called the 'target difference' and should be appropriate for the principal estimand of interest and determined by the primary aim of the study. The target difference between treatments should be considered realistic and/or important by one or more key stakeholder groups.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the report is to provide practical help on the choice of target difference used in the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial for researchers and funder representatives.

METHODS

The Difference ELicitation in TriAls2 (DELTA2) recommendations and advice were developed through a five-stage process, which included two literature reviews of existing funder guidance and recent methodological literature; a Delphi process to engage with a wider group of stakeholders; a 2-day workshop; and finalising the core document.

RESULTS

Advice is provided for definitive trials (Phase III/IV studies). Methods for choosing the target difference are reviewed. To aid those new to the topic, and to encourage better practice, 10 recommendations are made regarding choosing the target difference and undertaking a sample size calculation. Recommended reporting items for trial proposal, protocols and results papers under the conventional approach are also provided. Case studies reflecting different trial designs and covering different conditions are provided. Alternative trial designs and methods for choosing the sample size are also briefly considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Choosing an appropriate sample size is crucial if a study is to inform clinical practice. The number of patients recruited into the trial needs to be sufficient to answer the objectives; however, the number should not be higher than necessary to avoid unnecessary burden on patients and wasting precious resources. The choice of the target difference is a key part of this process under the conventional approach to sample size calculations. This document provides advice and recommendations to improve practice and reporting regarding this aspect of trial design. Future work could extend the work to address other less common approaches to the sample size calculations, particularly in terms of appropriate reporting items.

FUNDING

Funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC) UK and the National Institute for Health Research as part of the MRC-National Institute for Health Research Methodology Research programme.

Is Medical Therapy for Distal Ureteral Stones Efficient? Tamsulosin versus Deflazacort: A Prospective Randomised Trial

INTRODUCTION

 To evaluate the efficacy of tamsulosin and deflazacort in the spontaneous expulsion of distal ureteral stones when applied in an independent or combined manner.

METHODS

 134 patients with distal ureteral stones (4 - 10 mm) were included in tothe study. All patients were randomized into four groups: group 1 (n = 37) patients receiving tamsulosin (0.4 mg/day); group 2 (n = 26) patients receiving deflazacort (30 mg/day); group 3 (n = 37) patients receiving combined treatment (tamsulosin and deflazacort) with the same dosages; and group 4, control group cases (n = 34), receiving paracetamol on demand. Although deflazacort treatment was limited to 10 days due to the possible associated side effects, α-blocker and paracetamol lasted up to four weeks. Patients were followed up on a weekly basis and at the end of four weeks all groups were compared primarily with respect to the stone expulsion rates.

RESULTS

 No statistically significant difference was noted between all groups regarding the age, sex, or stone burden (p > 0.05). Spontaneous stone expulsion rates after 4 weeks were 64.8 %, 69.2 %, 75.7 %, and 26.4 % in group 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Spontaneous passage rates were statistically higher in all treatment groups when compared with the control group. Despite the highest spontaneous stone expulsion rate noted in group 3; this difference was not statistically significant when compared with the group 1 and 2. No major side effect related to the medications was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

 Tamsulosin facilitated the spontaneous passage of distal ureteral stones < 10 mm in size in an effective manner particularly when applied in combination with an oral corticosteroid.

Meta-analysis of the efficacy of sexual intercourse for distal ureteric stones

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of sexual intercourse for treatment of distal ureteral stones.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sexual intercourse for treatment of distal ureteral stones were searched using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register.

RESULTS

Three RCTs comprising 240 patients were included in the meta-analysis, which showed that sexual intercourse was effective in treating distal ureteral stones. The expulsion rate of distal ureteral stones at the second week (odds ratio [OR] = 6.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.66 to 11.94), expulsion rate of distal ureteral stones at the fourth week (OR = 4.00, 95% CI: 2.09 to 7.64), and number of analgesic injections (mean difference [MD] = -0.79, 95% CI: -1.51 to -0.08) indicated that sexual intercourse was more effective than placebo. However, the mean expulsion time of distal ureteral stones (MD = -3.98, 95% CI: -8.77 to 0.81) showed no difference between sexual intercourse and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, sexual intercourse exhibited greater efficacy for the treatment of distal ureteral stones, whilst potentially alleviating pain.

Management and outcome of obstructive ureteral stones in the emergency department: Emphasis on urine tests and antibiotics usage

BACKGROUND

Kidney stone related complaints in the Emergency Department (ED) are common. Current guidelines recommend antibiotic therapy for infected obstructive stones and stone removal in a timely fashion, but there is no clear recommendation for prophylactic antibiotic use for bacteriuria or pyuria in the setting of obstructive ureteral stones.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the current management of patients with obstructive ureteral stones in a single ED with emphasis on urine tests and antibiotics use.

METHODS

The picture archiving and communication system (PACS) was used to filter the list of patients who received a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis that positively identified obstructive ureteral stones. Demographics and clinical data were also recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the patients discharged, 278 patients did not receive antibiotics in the ED or a prescription. Of these, 8 patients had positive culture, 4 patients followed up, and one developed and was treated for a urinary-tract infection. One hundred ninety two patients were not given antibiotics in the ED but received an antibiotics prescription, and 4 patients had positive cultures grow. Two followed up and had no infection-related complications. Fourteen patients were discharged without a prescription after receiving a single dose of antibiotics in the ED, with no positive urine cultures and 9 patients following up without complication.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics were given at the discretion of the provider without clear pattern. A high rate of infectious complication did not occur in the followed up patient group.

Medical expulsive therapy for ureteric calculi – yes or no?

In recent years, there has been a potential paradigm shift in the conservative management of ureteric calculi away from the routine use of medical expulsive therapy (MET). A large body of evidence exists to hopefully answer this common clinical question. Multiple meta-analyses have been performed in the last decade to evaluate the existing evidence. Most, if not all have demonstrated benefit of administering MET for patients with ureteric calculi. In more recent years, the publication of several good quality, randomised controlled studies has cast doubt over the routine use of MET in these patients. These recent studies suggest that MET has no benefit in the conservative management of patients with ureteric calculi. In this article, we aim to provide a pragmatic commentary on the evidence to date and highlight the arguments both for and against the routine use of MET. We aim to highlight the steps that our unit has taken in translating good quality medical research into day-to-day clinical practice and also, to demonstrate our department’s current practice and the rationale behind it.

Efficacy of mirabegron in medical expulsive therapy

To show the efficacy of mirabegron for medical expulsive treatment, in patients had intramural located distal ureteral stone. A 80 patients had intramural ureteral stone were assessed retrospectively between April 2017 and January 2018. Mirabegron 50 mg/day + diclofenac 100 mg/day (group 1, n = 40), and only diclofenac 100 mg/day (group 2, n = 40) were administered to patients, consecutively. Age, gender, stone size, laterality, and severity of hydronephrosis were recorded. Spontaneous stone expulsion rates (SER), stone expulsion time, and the number of daily colic episodes were evaluated. In the group 1, one (2.5%) patient was excluded due to nasopharyngitis, and one (2.5%) patient was excluded due to 5 mmHg systolic blood pressure increase. In addition, four (10%) patients in group 1, and six (15%) patients in group 2, who did not attend follow-up examinations, were excluded from the study. There was not any statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender, stone location, severity of hydronephrosis, stone size (p = 0.736, p = 0.310, p = 0.467, p = 0.801, p = 0.761, consecutively). Spontaneous expulsion ratios were calculated as 73.52% in group 1, and 47.05% in group 2 (p = 0.026). However, there was not any statistically significant difference in terms of stone expulsion time (p = 0.979). SER for patients had ≤ 6 mm stones was higher in group 1 (87.5 vs 52.49%, p = 0.031). In addition, group 2 patients had more pain episodes (1.02 ± 0.52 vs. 1.29 ± 0.57, p = 0.049). In the current study, mirabegron has been shown to be an efficient, safe and a new treatment modality, with lower side effect profile for the intramural located distal ureteral stones.

Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones

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).

The effect of nitrous oxide in comparison to oxygen combined with fentanyl on the hospitalization time and pain reduction in renal colic patients at emergency department

Background

Renal colic is a painful medical emergency, needs urgent intervention to reduce pain. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and entonox are pain-relieving agents. This study was aimed to compare fentanyl + entonox (nitrous oxide + O₂) versus fentanyl + oxygen.

Materials and Methods

One hundred and twenty patients with acute renal colic presenting to the emergency department were enrolled. First, 50 μg fentanyl was infused for all patients. Then, patients divided into two groups receiving masks of entonox and oxygen, respectively. Quantitative measurement of pain was performed by visual analog scale, before the intervention, after 3, 5, 10, and 30 min of that. If the pain was not relieved after 30 min, 50 μg fentanyl was infused. If the pain was still continued, ketorolac and ketamine were used. Hospitalization duration and severity of pain at specified times were compared between patients in two groups.

Results

The mean (standard deviation) time of hospitalization was 211 (59) and 236 (61) min in fentanyl + entonox and fentanyl + O₂ groups, respectively (P = 0.024). The decrease in pain severity after 10 and 30 min in fentanyl + entonox group were significantly greater than fentanyl + O₂ group (P = 0.002 and 0.001, respectively). Mean (standard error) of needed time for renal colic pain to get better was 11.27 (1.23) and 20.47 (1.71) min in fentanyl + entonox and fentanyl + O₂ groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Proportion of patients relief from pain in fentanyl + entonox in the second, third, and fourth measurements were significantly more than fentanyl + O₂ group (P = 0.036, P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

Entonox is more effective to decrease the duration of hospitalization and reduction of pain than O₂ in renal colic patients.

Clinical Efficacy of Metoclopramide to Treat Pain and Nausea in Renal Colic Patients: A Prospective Randomised, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial

Introduction

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of intravenous metoclopramide for the relief of pain and nausea among the emergency department patients with renal colic.

Methods

Patients were randomised into three groups: tenoxicam (20 mg); tenoxicam (10 mg) plus metoclopramide (10 mg); and metoclopramide (10 mg). Changes in pain and nausea were examined at the 10th, 20th and 30th minute after treatment. The development of side effects would be recorded. After the 30th minute, the need for additional pain and nausea relief was evaluated.

Results

Totally 80 patients were enrolled in each group. There was significant mean pain score difference as measured by visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 minute to 10th, 20th and 30th minute post-treatment for all treatment groups (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in mean VAS decrease from 0 minute to the 30th minute: tenoxicam group: 36 mm [95% confidence interval (CI) 28-43 mm] vs. tenoxicam plus metoclopramide: 45 mm (95% CI 38-52 mm) vs. metoclopramide group: 37 mm (95% CI 30-45 mm) (p=0.163). Similarly, no significant differences in mean nausea scores between the three groups were demonstrated at the 10th, 20th and 30th minute after treatment (p=0.236, 0.330 and 0.652 respectively). After the 30th minute, 43 (53%) patients needed additional pain relieving agent in the tenoxicam group compared to 27 (33%) patients in the tenoxicam-metoclopramide group and 33 (41%) patients in the metoclopramide group (p=0.030). No significant adverse drug reaction events were encountered.

Conclusion

Metoclopramide is as effective as tenoxicam to treat pain and nausea for patients with renal colic in the emergency department. (Hong Kong j.emerg.med.2015;22:93-99)

Sexual intercourse as a new option in the medical expulsive therapy of distal ureteral stones in males: a prospective, randomized, controlled study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of sexual intercourse on the spontaneous passage of distal ureteral stones 5-10 mm in size.

METHODS

A total of 190 male patients with distal ureteral stones were randomly divided into three groups. Patients in group 1 were administered tamsulosin 0.4 mg/day (n = 60). Patients in group 2 were asked to have sexual intercourse at least three times a week (n = 66). Patients in group 3 received standard medical therapy alone and acted as the controls (n = 64). The expulsion rate was controlled after 2 and 4 weeks. Differences between the groups were analyzed statistically by the Chi-square and Student's t test. p < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

RESULTS

The mean ages of the patients in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 34.4 ± 13.5 (18-60), 38.6 ± 14.1 (18-63), and 36.92 ± 12.4 (18-59) years, respectively (p > 0.05). The mean stone size was 7.09 ± 1.4 mm in group 1, 7.01 ± 1.4 mm in group 2, and 7.1 ± 1.3 mm in group 3 (p > 0.05). Spontaneous passage rates in groups 1, 2, and 3 were 81.6, 81.8, and 51.5%, respectively, and it was significantly higher in group 1 (p = 0.0394) and group 2 (p = 0.0350). There was no significant difference between groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.9925). The analgesic needs in groups 1, 2, and 3 were found to be 1.3 ± 0.4, 1.2 ± 0.6, and 1.4 ± 0.4 times, respectively, and were significantly lower in the sexual intercourse group than in the control group (p = 0.0276).

CONCLUSIONS

Tamsulosin and sexual intercourse increase the spontaneous passage of distal ureteral stones 5-10 mm in size. At least three sexual intercourses per week seem to be at least as effective as tamsulosin. Sexual intercourse also reduces the need for analgesics in ureteric colic due to ureteral stones.

Silodosin in the treatment of distal ureteric stones in children: A prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled study

Objectives

To evaluate the possible role of silodosin (a highly selective α_1A-adrenoceptor antagonist) in facilitating the passage of distal ureteric stones (DUS) in children, as the role of α-blockers as medical expulsive therapy is well known in adults.

Patients and methods

In all, 40 paediatric patients (27 boys and 13 girls) diagnosed with unilateral, single, radiopaque DUS of <10 mm were included in the study. Their mean (SD, range) age was 8.1 (2.7, 5–17) years. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group A, received silodosin 4 mg as a single bedtime dose; and Group B, received placebo as a single bedtime dose. Ibuprofen was prescribed to both groups on-demand for pain episode relief. Patients were followed up biweekly for 4 weeks. The stone expulsion time and rate, pain episodes, analgesic use, and any adverse effects were recorded.

Results

The mean (SD) stone size in Group A was 6.6 (1.7) mm and in Group B was 6.7 (1.4) mm (P = 0.4). Two patients were lost to follow-up (one from each group), and one patient in Group A refused to complete the study. The stone-free rate at end of the 4-week treatment period was 88.8% in Group A vs 73.6% in Group B (P = 0.4). The mean (SD) stone expulsion time was 7.0 (4.3) vs 10.4 (4.7) days in groups A and B, respectively (P = 0.02). The mean (SD) number of pain episodes requiring ibuprofen was 2.3 (1.4) vs 4.7 (2.6) episodes in groups A and B, respectively (P < 0.001). Adverse effects (headache and dizziness) were recorded in three patients (16.7%) in Group A, which were mild and none of them discontinued treatment, whilst no adverse effects were recorded in Group B.

Conclusions

The data in the present study show that silodosin can be safely used in the treatment of DUS in children for decreasing time to stone expulsion, pain episodes, and analgesic requirement.

[S2k guidelines on diagnostics, therapy and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF 043/025) : Compendium]

Every tenth German citizen will suffer from at least one urinary calculus during the lifetime. The diagnostics, treatment and follow-up treatment of urolithiasis are, therefore, part of the daily routine practice for all urologists in hospitals and private practices as well as in many other disciplines, such as general practitioners, internists, nephrologists and pediatricians. Although the diagnostics and therapy have experienced substantial alterations over the last 10 years, the possibilities of metabolic diagnostics and secondary prevention for patients at risk are, unfortunately and unjustly, in many places very poorly represented. The present S2k guidelines, which for the first time were established in an interdisciplinary consensus process, represent the current practical recommendations and, whenever possible, use tables and algorithms in order to facilitate easy reference in the routine daily work. Last but not least, this greatly simplifies the measures for metaphylaxis.

Medical expulsive therapy for ureter stone using naftopidil: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial

Objectives

A prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the effects of naftopidil 75 mg for medical expulsive therapy for a single ureter stone.

Materials and methods

Patients diagnosed with a ureter stone were prescribed aceclofenac 100 mg or a combined medication of tramadol 37.5 mg and acetaminophen 325 mg. Patients then randomly received either naftopidil 75 mg or placebo. Primary endpoint was the stone passage rate at 14 days after medication.

Results

The 150 patients enrolled in 6 institutions randomly received either naftopidil (n = 75) or placebo (n = 75). The percentages of ureter stone passed spontaneously 14 days after medication was 60.9% in the naftopidil group and 53.3% in the placebo group. Stone-free rates and the total use of analgesics showed no significant differences between the two groups. Stone-free rates at 14 days after medication were decreased when maximal stone size was increased: 39.4% (≥ 5 mm), 15.5% (≥ 6 mm), and 7.0% (≥ 7 mm).

Conclusions

The use of naftopidil 75 mg once daily was not effective in increasing spontaneous stone passage rates or reducing analgesic use. The maximal stone size < 6 mm and the follow-up for two weeks would be appropriate for applying medical expulsive therapy to patients with a single ureter stone.

Medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones: Analysing the evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analysis of powered double-blinded randomised controlled trials

Objective

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the efficacy and safety of medical expulsive therapy (MET) in low risk of bias (RoB) randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

A Cochrane style systematic review was conducted on published literature from 1990 to 2016, to include low RoB and a power calculation. A pooled meta-analysis was conducted.

Results

The MET group included 1387 vs 1381 patients in the control group. The analysis reveals α-blockers increased stone expulsion rates (78% vs 74%) (P < 0.001), whilst calcium channel blockers (CCBs) had no effect compared to controls (79% vs 75%) (P = 0.38). In the subgroup analysis, α-blockers had a shorter time to stone expulsion vs the control group (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in expulsion rates between the treatment groups and control group for stones <5 mm in size (P = 0.48), proximal or mid-ureteric stones (P = 0.63 and P = 0.22, respectively). However, α-blockers increased stone expulsion in stones >5 mm (P = 0.02), as well as distal ureteric stones (P < 0.001). The α-blocker group developed more side-effects (6.6% of patients; P < 0.001). The numbers needed to treat for α-blockers was one in 14, for stones >5 mm one in eight, and for distal stones one in 10.

Conclusion

The primary findings show a small overall benefit for α-blockers as MET for ureteric stones but no benefit with CCBs. α-blockers show a greater benefit for large (>5 mm) ureteric stones and those located in the distal ureter, but no benefit for smaller or more proximal stones. α-blockers are associated with a greater risk of side-effects compared to placebo or CCBs.

Urolithiasis in pregnancy

Clinicians are faced with multiple diagnostic and treatment challenges when managing pregnant women with urolithiasis. Anatomical and physiological changes during pregnancy have to be taken into account whilst simultaneously considering both the expectant mother and the foetus. Ultrasonography remains the first-choice imaging modality, notwithstanding its potentially poor diagnostic accuracy. There is currently no consensus on second-line investigation for suspected urolithiasis. Low-dose non-contrast CT is highly sensitive, but the long-term effects of ionizing radiation on the foetus remain unknown. As far as treatment is concerned, expectant therapy is the primary option for management in the majority of cases. Percutaneous nephrostomy or ureteric stent placements are safe temporizing measures in relieving an acutely obstructed system and should be expedited in the presence of sepsis. Studies have shown ureteroscopy to be safe and effective during pregnancy with no significant risk to the foetus. It is important for the clinician to explain clearly the risks associated with the investigation and management options to the pregnant patient, including an acknowledgement that some of these remain unquantified, or even unknown.

The efficacy and safety of adrenergic alpha-antagonists in treatment of distal ureteral stones in pediatric patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adrenergic alpha-antagonists as a medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones in pediatric patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register databases were searched up to January 2016. All randomized controlled trials and all cohort studies in which patients were randomized to receive either adrenergic alpha-antagonists or placebo for ureteral stones were identified. The outcome measures assessed were overall stone expulsion rate (primary), expulsion time (secondary), and treatment-emergent adverse events.

RESULTS

Five trials with a total of 406 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. According to the doses of adrenergic alpha-antagonists, the pooling effects of adrenergic alpha-antagonists were analyzed, with a higher expulsion rate obtained than in controls, the stone expulsion rate (OR=2.70, 95% CI 1.49 to 4.91, P=0.001). Adrenergic alpha-antagonists statistically did not significantly decrease the number of the stone expulsion time with the placebo, the stone expulsion time (SMD=-4.65, 95% CI -9.76 to 0.45, P=0.07). Safety assessments included common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (OR=2.01, 95% CI 0.74 to 5.48, P=0.17). Compared with placebos, there was a higher stone expulsion rate with the adrenergic alpha-antagonists; in addition, fewer adverse effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis may suggest that adrenergic alpha-antagonists are a safe and effective medical expulsive therapy choice for ureteral stones in pediatric patients. As the level of classification of evidence-based medicine, the level of evidence of our article is Ia. But it remains to need a large-scale multicenter randomized controlled study to be further confirmed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

The level of evidence of our study is V.

Alpha blockers in the management of ureteric lithiasis: A meta-analysis

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.

Alpha blockers for treatment of ureteric stones: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

 To investigate the efficacy and safety of alpha blockers in the treatment of patients with ureteric stones.

DESIGN

 Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, LILACS, and Medline databases and scientific meeting abstracts to July 2016.

REVIEW METHODS

 Randomized controlled trials of alpha blockers compared with placebo or control for treatment of ureteric stones were eligible. : Two team members independently extracted data from each included study. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who passed their stone. Secondary outcomes were the time to passage; the number of pain episodes; and the proportions of patients who underwent surgery, required admission to hospital, and experienced an adverse event. Pooled risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the primary outcome with profile likelihood random effects models. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and the GRADE approach were used to evaluate the quality of evidence and summarize conclusions.

RESULTS

 55 randomized controlled trials were included. There was moderate quality evidence that alpha blockers facilitate passage of ureteric stones (risk ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 1.61). Based on a priori subgroup analysis, there seemed to be no benefit to treatment with alpha blocker among patients with smaller ureteric stones (1.19, 1.00 to 1.48). Patients with larger stones treated with an alpha blocker, however, had a 57% higher risk of stone passage compared with controls (1.57, 1.17 to 2.27). The effect of alpha blockers was independent of stone location (1.48 (1.05 to 2.10) for upper or middle stones; 1.49 (1.38 to 1.63) for lower stones). Compared with controls, patients who received alpha blockers had significantly shorter times to stone passage (mean difference -3.79 days, -4.45 to -3.14; moderate quality evidence), fewer episodes of pain (-0.74 episodes, -1.28 to -0.21; low quality evidence), lower risks of surgical intervention (risk ratio 0.44, 0.37 to 0.52; moderate quality evidence), and lower risks of admission to hospital (0.37, 0.22 to 0.64; moderate quality evidence). The risk of a serious adverse event was similar between treatment and control groups (1.49, 0.24 to 9.35; low quality evidence).

CONCLUSIONS

 Alpha blockers seem efficacious in the treatment of patients with ureteric stones who are amenable to conservative management. The greatest benefit might be among those with larger stones. These results support current guideline recommendations advocating a role for alpha blockers in patients with ureteric stones.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

 PROSPERO registration No CRD42015024169.

Tamsulosin versus tadalafil as a medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones: A prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of tamsulosin and tadalafil as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective randomized study was conducted at the Department of Urology of Bir Hospital over a period of 12 months in patients with distal ureteral stones sized 5 to 10 mm. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: group A received tamsulosin 0.4 mg and group B received tadalafil 10 mg at bedtime for 2 weeks. Stone expulsion rate, number of ureteric colic episodes and pain score, analgesic requirements, and adverse drug effects were noted in both groups. Statistical analyses were performed by using Student t-test and chi-square test.

RESULTS

Altogether 85 patients, 41 in group A and 44 in group B, were enrolled in the study. The patients' average age was 31.72±12.63 years, and the male-to-female ratio was 1.5:1. Demographic profiles, stone size, and baseline investigations were comparable between the 2 groups. The stone expulsion rate was significantly higher in the tadalafil group than in the tamsulosin group (84.1% vs. 61.0%, p=0.017). Although the occurrence of side effects was higher with tadalafil, this difference was not significant (p=0.099). There were no serious adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Tadalafil has a significantly higher stone expulsion rate than tamsulosin when used as a medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones sized 5-10 mm. Both drugs are safe, effective, and well tolerated with minor side effects.

Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha-blocker (tamsulosin) (the SUSPEND trial)

BACKGROUND

Ureteric colic, the term used to describe the pain felt when a stone passes down the ureter from the kidney to the bladder, is a frequent reason for people to seek emergency health care. Treatment with the muscle-relaxant drugs tamsulosin hydrochloride (Petyme, TEVA UK Ltd) and nifedipine (Coracten(®), UCB Pharma Ltd) as medical expulsive therapy (MET) is increasingly being used to improve the likelihood of spontaneous stone passage and lessen the need for interventional procedures. However, there remains considerable uncertainty around the effectiveness of these drugs for routine use.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether or not treatment with either tamsulosin 400 µg or nifedipine 30 mg for up to 4 weeks increases the rate of spontaneous stone passage for people with ureteric colic compared with placebo, and whether or not it is cost-effective for the UK NHS.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, randomised controlled trial comparing two active drugs, tamsulosin and nifedipine, against placebo. Participants, clinicians and trial staff were blinded to treatment allocation. A cost-utility analysis was performed using data gathered during trial participation.

SETTING

Urology departments in 24 UK NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged between 18 and 65 years admitted as an emergency with a single ureteric stone measuring ≤ 10 mm, localised by computerised tomography, who were able to take trial medications and complete trial procedures.

INTERVENTIONS

Eligible participants were randomised 1 : 1 : 1 to take tamsulosin 400 µg, nifedipine 30 mg or placebo once daily for up to 4 weeks to make the following comparisons: tamsulosin or nifedipine (MET) versus placebo and tamsulosin versus nifedipine.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary effectiveness outcome was the proportion of participants who spontaneously passed their stone. This was defined as the lack of need for active intervention for ureteric stones at up to 4 weeks after randomisation. This was determined from 4- and 12-week case-report forms completed by research staff, and from the 4-week participant self-reported questionnaire. The primary economic outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over 12 weeks. We estimated costs from NHS sources and calculated QALYs from participant completion of the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions health status questionnaire 3-level response (EQ-5D-3L™) at baseline, 4 weeks and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Primary outcome analysis included 97% of the 1167 participants randomised (378/391 tamsulosin, 379/387 nifedipine and 379/399 placebo participants). The proportion of participants who spontaneously passed their stone did not differ between MET and placebo [odds ratio (OR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.43; absolute difference 0.8%, 95% CI -4.1% to 5.7%] or between tamsulosin and nifedipine [OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.53; absolute difference 1%, 95% CI -4.6% to 6.6%]. There was no evidence of a difference in QALYs gained or in cost between the trial groups, which means that the use of MET would be very unlikely to be considered cost-effective. These findings were unchanged by extensive sensitivity analyses around predictors of stone passage, including sex, stone size and stone location.

CONCLUSIONS

Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not increase the likelihood of stone passage over 4 weeks for people with ureteric colic, and use of these drugs is very unlikely to be cost-effective for the NHS. Further work is required to investigate the phenomenon of large, high-quality trials showing smaller effect size than meta-analysis of several small, lower-quality studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN69423238. European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) number 2010-019469-26.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Medical expulsive therapy for pediatric urolithiasis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Kidney stone disease has become more common among children and young adults. Despite its well-documented success in adults, published success rates of medical expulsive therapy (MET) for pediatric urolithiasis vary widely. Our objective was to determine whether the aggregated evidence supports the use of MET in children.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, clinicaltrials.gov, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases, and recently presented meeting abstracts for reports in any language. In addition, the bibliographies of included studies were then hand-searched. The protocol was prospectively registered at PROSPERO (CRD42013005960). Inclusion criteria were children (aged ≤ 18 years) with urolithiasis treated with medications with the specific goal of increasing spontaneous stone passage rate, including but not limited to alpha-adrenergic blockers (e.g., tamsulosin or doxazosin), calcium channel blockers (e.g., nifedipine), or other adjuvant medications (e.g., steroids or tolterodine). Manuscripts were then assessed and data abstracted in duplicate, with differences resolved by the senior author. Risk of bias was assessed using standardized instruments. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed as appropriate.

RESULTS

We identified 11,197 studies, five of which (3 randomized controlled trials, 2 retrospective cohorts) were included in the pooled meta-analysis. Although we found little evidence of significant publication bias, we were unable to assess the likelihood of other forms of bias (allocation, selection) for most included studies due to reporting limitations. The pooled results demonstrate that MET significantly increased the odds of spontaneous stone passage (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.40-3.49). Between-study heterogeneity was not statistically significant (I(2) = 14%, p = 0.36). Bivariate meta-regression models revealed no significant association between the likelihood of stone passage and study COI (p = 0.9), study country (p = 0.7), patient age (p = 0.4), patient gender (p = 0.4), duration of follow-up (p = 0.3), or stone size (p = 0.7). Side effects of MET were reported to be minimal. Relatively few patients reported any adverse effects at all; the most commonly reported issue was somnolence. Concerns about biases affecting the published outcomes of the included studies exist due to the low quality of the randomized controlled trials reviewed for analysis. However, there was little visual evidence of publication bias noted on the funnel plot, as confirmed by the Begg test (p = 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with the adult literature, pediatric studies demonstrate that treatment with MET results in increased odds of spontaneous ureteral stone passage and a low rate of adverse events. Although the accumulated literature is limited by inconsistent and/or incomplete reporting, there is nonetheless a clear, cumulative positive effect of MET on stone passage among children. The available evidence thus supports a prominent role for MET in treatment algorithms for pediatric urolithiasis.