Is There a Role for Tamsulosin in Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal and Ureteral Calculi?

Ureteral wall thickness as a predictor for non-invasive treatment success for steinstrasse. Can we save time?

PURPOSE

We aimed to define factors affecting the non-invasive overall treatment success (medical expulsive therapy (MET) ± shock wave lithotripsy (SWL)) for uncomplicated ureteral steinstrasse (SS) clearance.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent SWL for renal stones between 2017 and 2021. Patients with uncomplicated SS were included. All patient's demographic and radiological data, e.g., age, gender, pre-SWL stenting, SS site, type, leading stone size in widest diameter (< 10 mm and ≥ 10 mm), ureteral wall thickness (UWT) in mm against the leading stone were collected. If SS was diagnosed, medical treatment was given for 4 weeks. In case of MET failure, either SWL for the leading stones + MET or direct URS was done. Non-invasive treatment success (SFR) was considered if complete clearance of SS occurred with no complications or the need for invasive intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients were included with mean age of 45.9 ± 12.4 years. SFR in case of MET only occurred in 27.9%. Complications happened in 26 patients (17.9%). Non-invasive treatment SFR was achieved in 78 patients (53.8%) totally where SS type I, leading stone size ≤ 10 mm type and decreased UWT around the leading stone increased treatment success.

CONCLUSION

Ureteral wall thickness is an important factor predicting SS management success. Besides the decreased UWT, non-invasive management should be offered for type I SS with leading stone ≤ 10 mm.

Is low-dose tadalafil better than tamsulosin? A randomized controlled trial in shockwave lithotripsy for solitary upper tract calculi

OBJECTIVE

To ascertain whether low-dose tadalafil (5 mg) is more efficient than tamsulosin (0.4 mg) in facilitating calculus expulsion in those receiving extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for solitary upper urinary tract calculi.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a triple-blinded, prospective, superiority, randomized controlled, single-centre trial. A total of 250 patients with solitary renal or ureteric calculus measuring 6-24 mm were randomized (1:1) to receive either 0.4 mg tamsulosin or 5 mg tadalafil daily for 30 days or until calculus clearance, whichever was earlier.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the primary outcome, namely, calculus expulsion rate at 30 days (tamsulosin vs tadalafil, n (%) 99 [81.1%] vs 98 [80.3%] respectively, 95% confidence interval = 0.8% [-9.0, 10.7], P = 0.874). Similarly, a lack of difference was also noted in the secondary outcome, number of days to expulsion (tamsulosin vs tadalafil, geometric mean [SD] 13.59 [2.39] vs 13.74 [2.39] respectively, P = 0.928). Four patients discontinued the drug due to adverse drug reactions in the tadalafil group.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose tadalafil is not superior to tamsulosin in improving calculus expulsion when used as an adjunct to shockwave lithotripsy. In this study, we also noted that tadalafil was less tolerated.

Outcomes of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy following shockwave lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine stone-free rate following shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) with/without alpha-blockers as well as complication rates (individual and classified using the Clavien-Dindo system).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials that included more than 20 patients (age > 18 years) and examined the use of alpha-blockers after SWL. Meta-analysis was performed using 'metafor' in R. We report risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The PROSPERO ID for the trial was: CRD42021248108.

RESULTS

We assessed 158 full-text articles and included a total of 21 studies in our review. There were 1445 patients receiving alpha-blockers and 1478 control patients. Those receiving alpha-blockers were significantly more likely to be stone-free (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07-1.16; P < 0.001). This effect was robust to 'trim-and-fill' adjustment. In those taking alpha-blockers there was a significant reduction in Clavien III-V complications and, on trim-and-fill adjustment, a significant reduction in Clavien I-II complications. There were also significant reduction in rates of steinstrasse, pain and requirement for auxiliary procedures. There was no significant difference in retreatment rates. These effects were robust to trim-and-fill adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a modest increase in stone-free rates in those receiving alpha-blockers following SWL, with a reciprocal modest risk reduction for steinstrasse, pain and auxiliary procedures. However, alpha-blockers do not reduce the risk of requiring retreatment.

Efficacy of Adjuvant Tamsulosin for Improving the Stone-Free Rate after Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Renal Stones: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is an effective treatment for urolithiasis. Tamsulosin is capable of causing dilation and facilitating the migration of stones. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant treatment with tamsulosin for improving the stone-free rate after a single session of ESWL in the treatment of kidney stones.

METHODS

This is a randomized, nonplacebo-controlled study with a sample of 60 adults with a single radiopaque kidney stone of 5-20 mm in diameter. After the ESWL session, the patients were divided into two groups. The control group received standard treatment for analgesia consisting of oral diclofenac (75 mg/12 h) as needed. The tamsulosin group received standard treatment for analgesia plus oral tamsulosin (0.4 mg/day) for eight weeks. In both groups, stone-free status was determined using a CT scan eight weeks after ESWL. The protocol of this study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04819828.

RESULTS

Only 57 patients completed the study (28 tamsulosin and 29 control). Overall, the average stone diameter was 11.42 ± 4.52 mm. The stone-free rate was 50.88% (29 of 57) overall, 53.57% (15 of 28) for the tamsulosin group, and 48.27% (14 of 29) for the control group (p = 0.680). The estimated relative risk in favor of the tamsulosin group to achieve a stone-free status was 1.11 (95% CI 0.67-1.9). The estimated number needed to treat to achieve a single patient with renal stone-free status after eight weeks of ESWL adjuvant treatment with tamsulosin was 19.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that tamsulosin as adjuvant treatment after a single ESWL session is well tolerated and safe, but it does not increase the stone-free rate in patients with a single radiopaque renal stone of 5-20 mm in diameter. Our results may support the use of tamsulosin with ESWL in the case of patients with a single radiopaque renal stone of 11-20 mm in diameter based on an apparent higher stone-free rate and a low rate of complications.

Effect of tamsulosin versus tamsulosin plus tadalafil on renal calculus clearance after shock wave lithotripsy: An open-labelled, randomised, prospective study

Objectives

To compare the efficacy of tamsulosin versus tamsulosin plus tadalafil in achieving clearance of fragments after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) to treat renal calculi.

Methods

Between January 2016 to December 2017, 140 patients with solitary, non-branched, non-lower calyceal renal calculus and measuring less than 20 mm and treated with SWL were randomized to tamsulosin (group A) or tamsulosin plus tadalafil (group B). Therapy was given for a period of 4 weeks. Stone clearance rate, analgesic requirement, occurrence of steinstrasse, need for auxiliary procedures (endoscopic treatment), and adverse effects of drugs were recorded.

Results

The overall clearance rate was 72.5% (50/69) in the group A and 90.1% (64/71) in the group B (p=0.007). For stones up to 12 mm, the difference in the clearance rate was significant (p=0.039) while it was not so for stones larger than 12 mm (p=0.151). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups with regards to analgesic requirement (p=0.94), occurrence of steinstrasse (p=0.101), need for auxiliary procedures (p=0.76), and adverse effects of the drugs (p=0.148).

Conclusion

Our study shows that adjunctive medical expulsive therapy with tamsulosin and tadalafil achieves better clearance rate than tadalafil alone in patients receiving SWL for renal stones.

Role of Tamsulosin with or without Deflazacort to facilitate stone clearance after ESWL: a single-center randomized controlled study

Background

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is the treatment of choice for upper tract calculi of moderate size. After ESWL, various factors affect the passage of small fragments through ureter like fragment’s size and location. To facilitate fragment passage, a lot of medications have been tried and few have stood the test of the time. In this prospective study, we evaluated the role of Tamsulosin with or without Deflazacort versus no treatment after ESWL for ureteric and renal stones in terms of requirement of the number of ESWL sessions, stone clearance rate, stone expulsion time and analgesia requirements.

Results

Patients presenting between age-groups of 18–70 years with solitary renal/ureteric calculus of size between 6 and 15 mm in major axis with Hounsfield unit less than 1000 were recruited in one of the three groups (A, B and C) randomly. Patients in Group A were prescribed Tamsulosin (0.4 mg once daily) with Deflazacort (30 mg once daily), Group B were given Tamsulosin (0.4 mg once daily), and Group C received no treatment (analgesics SOS and hydration therapy) after undergoing ESWL. Two hundred and twenty-five patients were recruited in Group A, and 240 patients were recruited in Group B and Group C each. There was an insignificant difference for required mean ESWL sessions and stone clearance rate between three groups. There was an early clearance of stone fragments in Group A than in Groups B and C, and it was statistically significant between Group A and Group C, specifically in the subgroup of stone size 10.1–15 mm. The requirement of mean analgesic tablets difference was significant between Groups A and C.

Conclusions

Tamsulosin with Deflazacort decreases the number of required ESWL sessions and improves complete stone clearance, but the difference is not significant. There were significant improvement in facilitating early stone clearance and decrease in requirement of mean analgesic tablets after ESWL with Tamsulosin and Deflazacort. Thus, Tamsulosin with Deflazacort can be used safely to facilitate stone clearance without increased complication rate.

Alpha-blockers after shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones in adults

BACKGROUND

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is a widely used method to treat renal and ureteral stone. It fragments stones into smaller pieces that are then able to pass spontaneously down the ureter and into the bladder. Alpha-blockers may assist in promoting the passage of stone fragments, but their effectiveness remains uncertain.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of alpha-blockers as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy plus usual care compared to placebo and usual care or usual care alone in adults undergoing shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, several clinical trial registries and grey literature for published and unpublished studies irrespective of language. The date of the most recent search was 27 February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of adults undergoing SWL. Participants in the intervention group had to have received an alpha-blocker as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy plus usual care. For the comparator group, we considered studies in which participants received placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion/exclusion, and performed data abstraction and risk of bias assessment. We conducted meta-analysis for the identified dichotomous and continuous outcomes using RevManWeb according to Cochrane methods using a random-effects model. We judged the certainty of evidence on a per outcome basis using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 studies with 4793 participants randomized to usual care and an alpha-blocker versus usual care alone. Only four studies were placebo controlled. The mean age of participants was 28.6 to 56.8 years and the mean stone size prior to SWL was 7.1 mm to 13.2 mm. The most widely used alpha-blocker was tamsulosin; others were silodosin, doxazosin, terazosin and alfuzosin.  Alpha-blockers may improve clearance of stone fragments after SWL (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.23; I² = 78%; studies = 36; participants = 4084; low certainty evidence). Based on the stone clearance rate of 69.3% observed in the control arm, an alpha-blocker may increase stone clearance to 80.4%. This corresponds to 111 more (62 more to 159 more) participants per 1000 clearing their stone fragments. Alpha-blockers may reduce the need for auxiliary treatments after SWL (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00; I² = 16%; studies = 12; participants = 1251; low certainty evidence), but also includes the possibility of no effect. Based on a rate of auxiliary treatments in the usual care arm of 9.7%, alpha-blockers may reduce the rate to 6.5%. This corresponds 32 fewer (53 fewer to 0 fewer) participants per 1000 undergoing auxiliary treatments. Alpha-blockers may reduce major adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.80; I² = 0%; studies = 7; participants = 747; low certainty evidence). Major adverse events occurred in 25.8% of participants in the usual care group; alpha-blockers would reduce this to 15.5%. This corresponds to 103 fewer (139 fewer to 52 fewer) major adverse events per 1000 with alpha-blocker treatment. None of the reported major adverse events appeared drug-related; most were emergency room visits or rehospitalizations. Alpha-blockers may reduce stone clearance time in days (mean difference (MD) -3.74, 95% CI -5.25 to -2.23; I² = 86%; studies = 14; participants = 1790; low certainty evidence). We found no evidence for the outcome of quality of life. For those outcomes for which we were able to perform subgroup analyses, we found no evidence of interaction with stone location, stone size or type of alpha-blocker. We were unable to conduct an analysis by lithotripter type. The results were also largely unchanged when the analyses were limited to placebo controlled studies and those in which participants explicitly only received a single SWL session.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low certainty evidence, adjuvant alpha-blocker therapy following SWL in addition to usual care may result in improved stone clearance, less need for auxiliary treatments, fewer major adverse events and a reduced stone clearance time compared to usual care alone. We did not find evidence for quality of life. The low certainty of evidence means that our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.

Is tamsulosin effective for the passage of symptomatic ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Some trials have stated that there is no benefit to tamsulosin administration for clearing ureteral stones, which is contrary to previous studies. To confirm the efficacy of tamsulosin for treating symptomatic ureteral stones, we performed this review.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify all studied variables, including tamsulosin, urinary stones, expulsion, and side effects. In addition, for all patients and different stone sizes, the treatment efficacy, expulsion rate, and expulsion time were also recorded for this treatment.

RESULTS

Forty-nine studies involving 6436 patients met the inclusion criteria. The data synthesized from these studies indicated that tamsulosin improved the renal stone clearance rate (80.5% vs 70.5%; mean difference (MD), 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.13-1.19; P <.00001) and reduced the expulsion time (MD, -3.61; 95% CI, -3.77 to -3.46; P ≤.00001). Regarding complications, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups in terms of the total side effects (MD, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.97-1.35; P = .10) or divided complications, including retrograde ejaculation (P = .01), hypotension (P = .52), dizziness (P = .07), diarrhea (P = .58), vomiting (P = .88), headache (P = .84), nausea (P = .91), and fatigue (P = .10).

CONCLUSIONS

Tamsulosin should be strongly recommended for patients with ureteral stones to increase treatment efficacy. The side effects were not significantly different between the tamsulosin and control treatments.

A prospective randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial to assess the effect of diuretics on shockwave lithotripsy of calculi

Objective

To assess the effect of diuretics with shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) on the treatment of renal and upper ureteric calculi.

Patients and methods

Adult patients with a solitary non-obstructive radio-opaque renal or upper ureteric calculus with normal renal function were included. They were prospectively randomised to receive either SWL with placebo or SWL with diuretics (40 mg parenteral furosemide) in a double-blind manner with a sample size of 48 patients in each arm. The primary outcomes were the SWL success and failure rates. The secondary outcomes were the number of shocks and sessions.

Results

Complete fragmentation was achieved in 89.6% of the patients in the furosemide arm as compared to 81.3% in the placebo arm. Clearance was achieved in 77.1% of the patients in the furosemide arm as compared to 70.8% in the placebo arm. The number of shocks and the number of sessions were higher in the placebo arm. These differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusion

The use of diuretics along with SWL treatment of renal and upper ureteric calculi does not show a statistically significant improvement in fragmentation or clearance.

A network meta-analysis on the beneficial effect of medical expulsive therapy after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

We applied a newly introduced method, network meta-analysis, to re-evaluate the expulsion effect of drugs including tamsulosin, doxazosin, nifedipine, terazosin and rowatinex after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) as described in the literature. A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library for articles published before March 2016. Twenty-six studies with 2775 patients were included. The primary outcome was the number of patients with successful stone expulsion. The data were subdivided into three groups according to duration of follow-up. A standard network model was established in each subgroup. In 15-day follow-up results, SUCRA outcome showed the ranking of effects was: doxazosin > tamsulosin > rowatinex > nifedipine > terazosin (88.6, 77.4, 58.6, 32.2 and 30.4, respectively). In 45-day follow-up results, SUCRA ranking was: tamsulosin > nifedipine > rowatinex (69.4, 67.2 and 62.6, respectively). In 90-day follow-up results, SUCRA ranking was: doxazosin > rowatinex > tamsulosin (84.1, 68.1 and 49.1, respectively). In conclusion, doxazosin and tamsulosin have potential to be the first choice for pharmacological therapy to promote the expulsion of urinary stone fragments after ESWL, with this doxazosin can improve the SFR in the long term, while tamsulosin may result more in accelerating the process of expulsion.

Can we predict the need for intervention in steinstrasse following shock wave lithotripsy?

Introduction:

Steinstrasse (SS) is a known complication of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). Although the majority of SS clears spontaneously, about 6% require intervention. This study was carried out to identify the factors that determine the need for intervention in SS.

Materials and Methods:

This was a retrospective study of all patients who developed steinstrasse following SWL at our center. They were divided into two groups: a) Those cleared spontaneously and b) Those required intervention. The two groups were compared with regard to demographic profile, stone factors and factors related to steinstrasse.

Results:

Out of 2436 cases of SWL, 89 (3%) formed steinstrasse. The majority of the patients (35%) who required intervention had stone sizes of 10-14 mm. Coptcoat type III steinstrasse required significantly more interventions for clearance (P = 0.001). The site and the size of the SS was not a predictor of intervention for SS.

Conclusions:

Early intervention is warranted in patients with steinstrasse where the lead fragment is >5 mm (Coptcoat type III).

Shock-wave lithotripsy: variance within UK practice

The objectives of this study are to determine the current treatment policies of UK shock-wave lithotripsy centres. Fixed-site lithotripter centres in the UK were identified via the national Therapeutic Interventions for Stones of the Ureter (TISU) study (n = 25). Questionnaires were completed regarding current SWL protocols for each centre, including management of anticoagulation, use of antibiotics and analgesia, urine testing, pacemakers, and arterial aneurysms. Data were collected regarding service delivery. Responses were obtained for 21 centres. Most centres use the Storz Modulith (85.7 %). Wide variation was observed in clinical contraindications to SWL, with 47.6 % centres performing SWL in patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm, 66.7 % performing SWL in patients with a pacemaker, and 66.7 % of centres not performing SWL in asymptomatic patients with a urine dipstick positive for nitrites and leucocytes. The management of anticoagulation pre- and post-SWL showed wide variation, with the omission of anticoagulation ranging from 0 to 10 days pre-SWL. Seventeen distinct analgesia regimens were reported and prophylactic antibiotics are routinely administered in 25.0 % of centres. Tamsulosin is prescribed to all patients in 20.0 % of centres and a further 15.0 % of centres routinely prescribe tamsulosin post-SWL of ureteric stones. The included centres undertake SWL a median of 4 days per week and treat a median of six patients per list. Emergency SWL is unavailable in 30.0 % of centres. This observational real-life study has identified a significant disparity in the delivery of SWL throughout the UK, despite high numbers of patients with renal and ureteric stones being treated with this modality. Further studies should address the key areas of controversy, including an assessment of technical training, and facilitate the development of national guidelines to ensure a high level of standardized care for SWL patients.

Tamsulosin or Silodosin Adjuvant Treatment Is Ineffective in Improving Shockwave Lithotripsy Outcome: A Short-Term Follow-Up Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

INTRODUCTION

The role of α-blockers after shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is controversial. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of tamsulosin and silodosin after SWL for kidney stones.

METHODS

From 2012 onward, a consecutive series of patients undergoing SWL were prospectively enrolled and randomized by closed envelopes in three groups receiving tamsulosin 0.4 mg (A), silodosin 8 mg (B), and placebo (C) daily for 21 days after SWL. Anthropometrics, stone size, and location were recorded before SWL. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score was collected at 6, 12, and 24 hours after treatment to evaluate patients' discomfort. Stone-free rate was assessed 1 and 3 weeks postoperatively. Complications and medical treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Differences in VAS score, stone-free rate, and complications were compared among the groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 60 patients were enrolled. Mean stone sizes were 10.28 ± 2.46 mm, 10.45 ± 1.73 mm, and 9.23 ± 2.04 mm in groups A, B, and C, respectively (p = 0.474). There was no significant difference between the three groups with regard to stone location. Comparable energy was used to treat patients from the three groups. The overall 3-week stone-free rate was 53%: 58% in the tamsulosin group, 47% in the silodosin group, and 55% in the placebo group (p = 0.399). No significant differences were observed in the VAS scores reported by the groups at 6 hours (p = 1.254), 12 hours (p = 0.075), and 24 hours (p = 0.490). Overall, 12 complications were reported: 11 patients (7 in group C and 4 in group B) needed analgesics for colic, and 1 patient (group B) was surgically treated for Steinstrasse. Tamsulosin was superior to placebo (p = 0.008) and silodosin (p = 0.021) in preventing complications; no difference between silodosin and placebo (p = 0.629) was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Tamsulosin and silodosin are ineffective in increasing stone-free rate as well as early patients' discomfort after extracorporeal lithotripsy.

Is Tamsulosin Effective after Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Pediatric Renal Stones? A Randomized, Controlled Study

PURPOSE

We assessed the effect of tamsulosin as an adjunctive therapy after shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric single renal pelvic stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 120 children with a unilateral single renal pelvic stone were included in a prospective randomized, controlled study. All children were randomized to 2 equal groups. Group 1 received tamsulosin (0.01 mg/kg once daily) as adjunctive therapy after shock wave lithotripsy in addition to paracetamol while group 2 received paracetamol only. Stone clearance was defined as no renal stone fragments or fragments less than 3 mm and no pelvicalyceal system dilatation.

RESULTS

Our study included 69 boys and 51 girls with a median age of 3.5 years and a median stone size of 1.2 cm. There was no statistically significant difference between groups 1 and 2 in stone or patient criteria. Of the children 99 (82.5%) achieved stone clearance after the first session, including 50 in group 1 and 49 in group 2. All children in each group were cleared of stones after the second session. The overall complication rate was 14.2%. There was no statistically significant difference between single session stone clearance rates (p = 0.81) and complications rates (p = 0.432) in either group. On multivariate analysis using logistic regression smaller stone size (p = 0.016) and radiopaque stones (p = 0.019) were the only predictors of stone clearance at a single shock wave lithotripsy session. Tamsulosin therapy did not affect stone clearance (p = 0.649).

CONCLUSIONS

Tamsulosin does not seem to improve renal stone clearance. Smaller and radiopaque renal stones have more chance of clearance after shock wave lithotripsy for pediatric single renal pelvic stones.

CUA Guideline: Management of ureteral calculi

The focus of this guideline is the management of ureteral stones. Specifically, the topics covered include: conservative management, medical expulsive therapy, active intervention with either shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or ureteroscopy (URS), factors affecting SWL treatment success, optimizing success, and special considerations (e.g., pregnancy, urinary diversion). By performing extensive literature reviews for each topic evaluated, we have generated an evidence-based consensus on the management of ureteral stones. The objective of this guideline is to help standardize the treatment of ureteral stones to optimize treatment outcomes.

The Efficacy of Medical Expulsive Therapy (MET) in Improving Stone-free Rate and Stone Expulsion Time, After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) for Upper Urinary Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

In this meta-analysis, we included randomized studies on medical expulsive therapy implemented following shock wave lithotripsy for renal and ureteral stones. Pooled results demonstrated the efficacy of α-blockers, nifedipine, Rowatinex, and Uriston in increasing stone clearance. In addition, the time to stone elimination, the intensity of pain, the formation of steinstrasse, and the need for auxiliary procedures were reduced mainly with α-blockers. Expulsion rate was not correlated with the type of α-blocker, the diameter, and the location of stone. Our results show that medical expulsive therapy for residual fragments after shock wave lithotripsy should be implemented in clinical practice.

Medical expulsive treatment in pediatric urolithiasis

The frequency of stone disease in childhood ranges between 0.1-5 percent. Stone disease occurs as a result of enviromental, metabolic, anatomical, infectious and nutritional factors. Percutaneous nephrolitotomy, uretherorenoscopy, laparoscopic surgery, open surgery and extracorporeal shock wave lithothripsy are treatment alternatives for stone disease during childhood. However, these methods are not completely innocent. Some complications may occur after these procedures. These procedures are generally not cost- effective. Even invasive procedures have high success rates, so medical expulsive treatment modalities have become an alternative for a group of patients. Nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs, antimuscarinic drugs, phospodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, steroids, calcium channel blockers and alpha blockers are treatment alterneatives used for this modality in the literature. The drug is chosen according to the location, size, and composition of the stone, recent technology, cost, surgeon's experience and surgeon's and the parents' preferences. In this review article the following topics will be discussed such as "Why medical expulsive treatment is needed during childhood? Which drug should be chosen for which stone type? How long should a treatment of urolithiasis last?

The Efficacy and Safety of Tamsulosin Combined with Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy for Urolithiasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Many studies have been conducted to investigate adjunctive tamsulosin therapy after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for urolithiasis. The results from those studies, however, are still inconsistent. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to provide an update on the clinical efficacy and safety of tamsulosin combined with SWL for urolithiasis.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify all relevant randomized controlled trials until January 2015. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Meta-analysis was conducted with Review Manager (RevMan), version 5.1.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (2093 subjects in total) were identified in the current meta-analysis. Compared with a control group, the experimental group (tamsulosin combined with SWL) showed an increased overall benefit for stone expulsion, with pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.20 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.26). With respect to the different geographic regions, European and American had a high possibility of improvement in stone expulsion (RR: 1.33, 95% CI, 1.19-1.49). According to the stone locations (renal, upper and lower ureteral) and sizes (4-10 mm and 11-24 mm), tamsulosin is more useful for lower ureteral stone (RR: 1.28; 95% CI, 1.14-1.43) and larger sized stones (RR: 1.49; 95% CI, 1.28-1.75). The effect estimates did not vary markedly when stratified by follow-up durations but varied by dose of tamsulosin. Furthermore, a shorter expulsion time, reduced occurrence of steinstrasse, fewer incidences of colic, and lower analgesic requirements were observed within the experimental group. In addition, tamsulosin is well tolerated, and its adverse events rarely led to dropouts of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, evidence suggests that tamsulosin combined with SWL is safe and effective in enhancing stone expulsion for patients with urolithiasis. Furthermore, high-quality, randomized and placebo-controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of tamsulosin should be performed.

Adjunctive medical therapy with α-blocker after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteral stones: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although some trials assessed the efficacy and safety of the α-blocker in facilitating renal and ureteral stones expulsion after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), the role of the α-blocker in facilitating upper urinary calculi expulsion after ESWL remain controversial.

AIMS

To determine the efficacy and safety of the α-blocker in facilitating renal and ureteral stones expulsion after ESWL.

METHODS

A literature search was carried out using the PubMed database, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library database to identify relevant studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. Pooled effect estimates were obtained using a fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 23 RCTs, α-blocker significantly enhanced expulsion rate of upper urinary tract calculi after ESWL (P<0.00001; RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.12-1.31), significantly promoted steinstrasse expulsion (P=0.03; RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.03-1.53), significantly shortened the discharge time of upper urinary tract calculi (P=0.0001; MD -2.12; 95% CI -3.20--1.04), significantly reduced the patient's pain VAS score (P=0.001; RR -1.0; 95% CI -1.61--0.39). Compared with the control group, dizziness (P=0.002; RR 5.48; 95% CI 1.91-15.77), anejaculation (P=0.02; RR 12.17; 95% CI 1.61-91.99) and headache (P=0.04; RR 4.03; 95% CI 1.04-15.72) in the α-blocker group was associated with a higher incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with α-blocker after ESWL appears to be effective in enhancing expulsion rate of upper urinary tract calculi, shortening the discharge time of upper urinary tract calculi, reducing the patient's pain. The side effects of α-blocker were light and few.

Role of removing stasis and reducing heat formula in clearance of proximal ureteral calculi after ureteroscopic Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy: a prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively evaluate the efficacy of Removing Stasis and Reducing Heat Formula in accelerating calculus clearance and improving lower urinary tract symptoms of patients with proximal ureteral calculi after ureteroscopic Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy.

METHODS

A total of 138 patients with proximal ureteral calculi underwent ureteroscopic Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy by a single endocrinologist. Stone size varied from 10 to 15 mm. After operation, the patients were randomly divided into three groups: the control group (group A), tamsulosin group (group B), and Removing Stasis and Reducing Heat Formula group (group C). The treatment lasted for 4 weeks or until stone clearance. The primary and secondary outcomes of the three groups at follow-up were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 131 patients available for follow-up, 44 cases were in the group A, 45 in the group B, and 42 in the group C, respectively. The stone free rate at 2 weeks in the groups B and C were significantly higher than that in the group A (95.56%, 97.62% vs. 79.55%; all P<0.05). The ureteral colic rate and mean time of fragment expulsion were significantly reduced in the groups B (4.44% and 7.86±4.99 days) and C (2.43% and 6.76±4.37 days) compared with the group A (22.73% and 11.54±9.89 days, all P<0.05). On the day of double-J ureteric stent removal, the group C differed significantly from the group A in the total International Prostate Symptom Score, irritative subscore, obstructive subscore, and quality of life score (all P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Removing Stasis and Reducing Heat Formula in the medical expulsive therapy might be an effective modality for patients with calculus in the proximal uretera after ureteroscopic Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy.

The effect of tamsulosin on pain and clearance according to ureteral stone location after shock wave lithotripsy

Background

Medical expulsion therapy has shown encouraging results in facilitating spontaneous clearance of ureteral stones after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. However, no other study has yet determined the benefit of medical expulsion therapy for stones in different ureteral locations.

Objective

The aim of the study was to evaluate tamsulosin as adjunctive therapy to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in terms of pain clearance of stones in the upper, middle, and lower ureter.

Methods

Between June 2008 and July 2011, patients with a solitary ureteral stone that was ≥6 mm up to 15 mm and located in the upper, middle, or lower ureter undergoing SWL were evaluated. The patients were randomly allocated to a conservative treatment (group 1) and a tamsulosin treatment group (group 2). Administration of the drug was started immediately after SWL and was continued for a maximum of 28 days. Patients were evaluated for stone clearance, time to stone clearance, and number of SWL sessions. The pain intensity was evaluated by visual analog scale.

Results

There were 64 patients in the control group and 59 in the tamsulosin group. The average stone sizes were 10.70 (3.20) mm and 11.40 (3.01) mm (P = 0.24). Group 1 and group 2 received 2507 (984) and 2759 (775) shock waves (P = 0.86), 1.53 (0.8) and 1.49 (0.75) sessions (P = 0.85), respectively. Mean visual analog scale scores and times to clearance were 3.81 (2.74) and 2.73 (2.28) (P = 0.00) and 12.59 (8.63) days and 8.34 (7.60) days (P = 0.00), respectively, for all stones in groups 1 and 2. Only the clearance time of upper ureteral stones between groups showed statistical significance (13.54 [8.32] days vs 7.10 [6.40] days; P = 0.00).

Conclusions

Tamsulosin may help in the treatment of all ureteral stones after SWL, particularly stones in the upper ureter, with a shorter time to clearance and less need for analgesic drugs.

The efficacy of tamsulosin therapy after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for ureteric calculi: A prospective randomised, controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether tamsulosin hydrochloride is effective as an adjunctive medical therapy to increase the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for treating ureteric stones, and minimises the use of analgesic drugs after the procedure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To treat single ureteric stones of 5-15 mm in diameter, 130 patients were treated with ESWL. After treatment, equal numbers of patients were randomly assigned to receive either the standard medical therapy alone (controls) or combined with 0.4 mg tamsulosin daily for ⩽12 weeks. All patients were followed up for 3 months or until an alternative treatment was offered.

RESULTS

At 3 months the treatment was considered to be clinically successful in 55/65 (85%) of those receiving tamsulosin and in 58/65 (89%) of the controls (P = 0.34). When patients were classified according to stone size the success rate was similar in both groups (P = 0.22) for those with a stone of >10 mm. However, ureteric colic was reported in 12% of patients treated with standard therapy but in only 5% of those treated with tamsulosin (P = 0.006). The mean cumulative diclofenac dose was 380 mg/patient in the tamsulosin group and 750 mg/patient in the control group (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed the effectiveness of tamsulosin as an adjunctive medical therapy after ESWL for ureteric stones, but it did not improve stone clearance when treating ureteric stones. However, it decreased the use of analgesics and reduced the complication rate, especially for steinstrasse.

The presence and distribution of alpha adrenergic receptors in human renal pelvis and calyces

In this study, we aimed to demonstrate the presence of Alpha (α) 1 receptors and subtypes in human pelvis and calyces, because an agent to facilitate kidney stone movement and help decrease pain may be an α 1 adrenergic blocker, as used in ureteral stones. Twenty patients who applied to our clinic for renal cell carcinoma were enrolled to the study. All patients underwent radical nephrectomy. After the specimens were removed, excisional biopsies were performed on healthy pelvises and calyces. Mean α-receptor stain rates in renal pelvis were 2.65 ± 0.74, 1.35 ± 0.81 and 2.9 ± 0.30 for α 1A, 1B and 1D, respectively. For calyces, the rates are 2.40 ± 0.82, 1.50 ± 0.76 and 2.75 ± 0.44 for α 1A, 1B and 1D, respectively (Fig. 1). When the staining patterns were compared, α 1A and 1D were expressed more in both pelvis and calyces than α 1B (p < 0.05). After the demonstration of α-adrenergic receptors in pelvis and calyces of human kidney, it may be helpful in coming up with new alternative treatments for patients suffering from kidney stones.

Complications of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary stones: to know and to manage them-a review

To identify the possible complications after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and to suggest how to manage them, the significant literature concerning SWL treatment and complications was analyzed and reviewed. Complications after SWL are mainly connected to the formation and passage of fragments, infections, the effects on renal and nonrenal tissues, and the effects on kidney function. Each of these complications can be prevented adopting appropriate measures, such as the respect of the contraindications and the recognition and the correction of concomitant diseases or infection, and using the SWL in the most efficient and safe way, tailoring the treatment to the single case. In conclusion, SWL is an efficient and relatively noninvasive treatment for urinary stones. However, as with any other type of therapy, some contraindications and potential complications do exist. The strictness in following the first could really limit the onset and danger of the appearance of others, which however must be fully known so that every possible preventive measure be implemented.

Efficacy of tamsulosin oral controlled absorption system after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy to treat urolithiasis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of the tamsulosin oral controlled absorption system as an adjuvant therapy to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the expulsion of ureteral and renal stones.

METHODS

A consecutive sample of 248 patients with ureteral or renal stones who underwent ESWL in an academic hospital was included in a 12-week, prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial. Of the 248 patients, 186, including 77 with ureteral stones (mean size 9 mm) and 109 with renal stones (mean size 13 mm) completed the study. After successful ESWL, the patients were randomized to standard medical care (corticosteroids and analgesics) or standard care plus the tamsulosin oral controlled absorption system 0.4 mg/d for 1 month. The stone clearance rate, interval to the elimination of stone fragments, incidence of renal colic, and the need for rehospitalization were assessed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The stone clearance rate was significantly greater for the patients treated with tamsulosin than for those in the standard care group at 4 (73.4% vs 55.9%, respectively; P < .001) and 12 (91.3% vs 74.6%, respectively; P < .05) weeks. Tamsulosin treatment was also associated with a significantly lower interval to the elimination of stone fragments (P < .001), a significantly lower rehospitalization rate (P < .001), and a significantly lower proportion of patients with acute renal colic (P < .05) than standard care alone. No severe adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were observed.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant treatment with tamsulosin, in addition to standard treatment with steroids and analgesics, improved the outcome of ESWL.

Ureterorenoscopy: avoiding and managing the complications

Retrograde exploration of the ureter and kidneys is currently a widely used and well-established procedure to deal with problems of a diagnostic and therapeutic nature with reduced invasiveness. The process of miniaturizing the instruments combined with the steady improvement in video quality has continuously amplified its potential applications, maintaining the procedure safe and rapid. During an operation, however, unexpected events may condition a change to the programme or determine the onset of even more serious complications. Our aim is to analyze such events and complications and recommend potential solutions to prevent and/or deal with such happenings.

Adjuncts to improve outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) has been a major tool in the treatment of urinary stones for nearly three decades. In recent years, SWL technology has been less effective at fragmenting stones than earlier devices; thus, adjunctive maneuvers to improve stone-free rates after SWL have been required. This article summarizes several of these adjuncts, such as slower shock wave rate, the use of percussion therapy to clear fragments, medications to hasten expulsion of fragments, and appropriate selection and positioning of patients for SWL.

Medical therapy to facilitate the passage of stones: what is the evidence?

CONTEXT

Medical expulsive therapy (MET) for urolithiasis has gained increasing attention in the last years. It has been suggested that the administration of alpha-adrenoreceptor antagonists (alpha-blockers) or calcium channel blockers augments stone expulsion rates and reduces colic events.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of MET with alpha-blockers and calcium channel blockers for upper urinary tract stones with and without prior extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of the literature was performed in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews searched through 31 December 2008 without time limit. Efficacy and safety end points were evaluated in 47 randomised, controlled trials assessing the role of MET. Meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) v.5.0 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Pooling of alpha-blocker and calcium channel blocker studies demonstrated a higher and faster expulsion rate compared to a control group (risk ratio [RR]: 1.45 vs 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-1.57 vs 1.33-1.66). Similar results have been obtained after ESWL (RR: 1.29 vs 1.57; 95% CI: 1.16-1.43 vs 1.21-2.04). Additionally, lower analgesic requirements, fewer colic episodes, and fewer hospitalisations were observed within treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled analyses suggest that MET with alpha-blockers or calcium channel blockers augments stone expulsion rates, reduces the time to stone expulsion, and lowers analgesia requirements for ureteral stones with and without ESWL for stones < or = 10 mm. There is some evidence that a combination of alpha-blockers and corticosteroids might be more effective than treatment with alpha-blockers alone. Renal stones after ESWL also seem to profit from MET. The vast majority of randomised studies incorporated into the present systematic review are small, single-centre studies, limiting the strength of our conclusions. Therefore, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trials are needed.

Adjuvant therapy after surgical stone management

The aim of this article was to review the most widely researched adjuvant medical therapies for the surgical management of urolithiasis. Articles were identified and reviewed from PubMed and Medline databases with MeSH headings focusing on the various surgical treatments of urolithiasis and adjuvant therapy. Additional articles were retrieved from references and conference proceedings. Surgical treatments reviewed included shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Adjuvant therapy was considered medical or complementary therapy as an adjunct to these surgical interventions. Adjuvant therapy for the surgical management of urolithiasis has been documented to increase stone-free rates, reduce stone remission rates, prevent renal damage, and decrease postoperative morbidity. A variety of agents have been studied, ranging from antioxidants to alpha-blockers and to alkalinizing agents. Additionally, there is increasing interest in complementary adjuvant therapy (ie, acupuncture). Adjuvant therapy is a fertile area for research in the surgical management of urolithiasis. The optimal agents have yet to be determined and therefore further investigation is warranted and necessary.