Tamsulosin Facilitates Earlier Clearance of Stone Fragments and Reduces Pain After Shockwave Lithotripsy for Renal Calculi: Results From an Open-Label Randomized Study

A Comparison of Boron Supplement and Tamsulosin as Medical Expulsive Therapy for Urinary Stones After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Treatment with alpha-blockers has been used in many studies to facilitate stone clearance after extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), based on mediating ureteral wall relaxation. Ureteral wall edema is another barrier against the stone passage. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of boron supplement (due to its anti-inflammatory effect) and tamsulosin in the passage of stone fragments after ESWL. Eligible patients after ESWL were randomly assigned to two groups and were treated with boron supplement (10 mg/BD) or tamsulosin (0.4 mg per night) for 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the stone expulsion rate according to the remained fragmented stone burden. The secondary outcomes were the time of stone clearance, pain intensity, drug side effects, and the need for auxiliary procedures. In this randomized control trial, 200 eligible patients were treated with boron supplement or tamsulosin. Finally, 89 and 81 patients in the two groups completed the study, respectively. The expulsion rate was 46.6% in the boron and 38.7% in the tamsulosin group, which there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.003), as well as the time of stone clearance (7.47 ± 22.4 vs 6.52 ± 18.45, days, p = 0.648, respectively), after 2-week follow-up. Moreover, pain intensity was the same in both groups. No Significant side effects were reported in the two groups. Boron supplement could be effective as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy after ESWL with no significant side effects in short-term follow-up. Iranian Clinical Trial Registration number and date of registration: IRCT20191026045244N3, 07/29/2020.

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.

Effect of alpha-adrenoceptor antagonists on sexual function. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Alpha-adrenoreceptor antagonists or alpha-blockers are used in the treatment of hypertension, in the therapy of benign prostatic hyperplasia and in medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones. These agents may affect the sexual function, with differences between drugs within the same class, depending on their selectivity for receptor subtypes. The aim of this review was to analyze the effects of alpha-blockers on sexual function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching PubMed, EMBASE and other databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting sexual adverse effects in patients treated with alpha-blockers. Odds ratios for sexual dysfunction were calculated using random effects Mantel-Haenszel statistics.

RESULTS

Out of 608 records retrieved, 75 eligible RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, alphablockers were associated with increased odds of ejaculatory disorders both in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (OR: 7.53, 95% CI: 3.77-15.02, Z = 5.73, p < 0.00001, I2 = 55%) and in patients with ureteral stones (OR: 2.88, 95% CI: 1.50-5.44, Z = 3.19, p < 0.001, I2 = 31%). Uroselective alpha-blockers showed higher odds of ejaculatory disorders. Conversely, nonselective alpha-blockers were not associated with higher odds of ejaculatory dysfunction. Silodosin was associated with increased odds of ejaculatory dysfunction compared with tamsulosin (OR: 3.52, 95% CI: 2.18-5.68, 15 series, 1512 participants, Z = 5.15, p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%). Naftopidil and alfuzosin showed lower odds of ejaculatory dysfunction compared to uroselective alpha-blockers.No statistically significant differences in the odds of erectile dysfunction were observed when alpha-blockers were compared to placebo.

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.

Natural history of small asymptomatic kidney and residual stones over a long-term follow-up: systematic review over 25 years

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the natural history of small asymptomatic kidney and residual stones, as the incidental identification of small, asymptomatic renal calculi has risen with increasing use of high-resolution imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed the natural history of small asymptomatic kidney and residual stones using the Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, EBSCO, Cochrane library and Clinicaltrials.gov using themes of 'asymptomatic', 'nephrolithiasis', 'observation', 'symptoms', 'admission', 'intervention' and similar allied terms for all English language articles from 1996 to 2020 (25 years). Inclusion criteria were studies with ≥50 patients, stones ≤10 mm, and a mean follow-up of ≥24 months. Primary outcomes were occurrence of symptoms, emergency admission, and interventions.

RESULTS

Our literature search returned 2247 results of which 10 papers were included in the final review. Risk of symptomatic episodes ranged from 0% to 59.4%. Meta-analysis did not identify any significant difference in the likelihood of developing symptoms when comparing stones <5 mm to those >5 mm, nor those <10 mm to those >10 mm. Risk of admission varied from 14% to 19% and the risk of intervention from 12% to 35%. Meta-analysis showed a significantly decreased likelihood of intervention for stones <5 vs >5 mm and <10 vs >10 mm. Studies had variable risk of bias due to heterogeneous reporting of outcome measures with significant likelihood that observed differences in results were compatible with chance alone (Symptoms: I² =0%, Cochran's Q = 3.09, P = 0.69; Intervention: I² =0%, Cochran's Q = 1.76, P = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

The present systematic review indicates that stone size is not a reliable predictor of symptoms; however, risk of intervention is greater for stones >5mm vs <5 mm and >10 vs <10 mm. This review will inform urologists as they discuss management strategies with patients who have asymptomatic renal stones and offer insight to committees during the development of evidence-based guidelines.

Adjunctive medical expulsive therapy with tamsulosin for repeated extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose:

To evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive medical expulsive therapy (MET) with tamsulosin for the promotion of stone fragments clearance for repeated extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL).

Materials and Methods:

This meta-analysis was conducted by systematic search for randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science databases in January 2020, which compared tamsulosin with either placebo or non-placebo control for repeated ESWL. The primary endpoint was stone-free rate (SFR), the second endpoints were stone clearance time and complications. The quality assessment of included studies was performed by using the Cochrane System and Jadad score.

Results:

7 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Tamsulosin provided higher SFR (for stones larger than 1cm, OR: 5.56, p=0.0003), except for patients with stones less than 1cm. For patients with renal stones (OR: 2.97, p=0.0005) or upper ureteral stones (OR: 3.10, p=0.004), tamsulosin can also provide a higher SFR. In addition, tamsulosin provided a shorter stone clearance time (WMD: −9.40, p=0.03) and lower pain intensity (WMD=-17.01, p <0.0001) and incidences of steinstrasse (OR: 0.37, p=0.0002).

Conclusion:

Adjunctive MET with tamsulosin is effective in patients with specific stone size or location that received repeated ESWL. However, no well-designed RCT that used computed tomography for the detection and assessment of residual stone fragments was found. More studies with high quality and the comparison between tamsulosin and secondary ESWL are needed in the future.

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.

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.

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.

Current ESWL practice and outcomes in the UK: A multicentre snapshot

Objectives:

The objective of this article is to investigate the current clinical practice and outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in the United Kingdom.

Patients and methods:

Patient demographics, stone characteristics and SWL protocols were collected prospectively for 30 consecutive new patient referrals at each of seven contributing UK institutions performing SWL. Final outcomes in terms of stone-free rates (SFRs), and complications were recorded.

Results:

Completed demographic data were available for 204 patients. Treatment protocols varied between centres. Mean patient age was 51 years. Over 70% of stones treated measured between 5 and 10 mm, and one-third were in the ureter, with two-thirds in the kidney, where the majority (31% overall) were in the lower pole. The overall cumulative SFR was 50.3% (range 33–70% between centres). SWL was notably more effective for ureteric stones (SFR 59.3% overall) than for renal calculi (SFR 45.6% overall). Complications were noted in six patients.

Conclusion:

This study provides a valuable snapshot of real-life clinical practice and demonstrates considerable variability in the application of SWL in the UK. The results support existing data which suggest that SWL is a safe and well tolerated treatment modality; however, overall SFRs were low.

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.

Role of Tamsulosin Therapy after Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones: Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the efficacy of adjunctive tamsulosin therapy after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for renal stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study was conducted on patients who underwent single-session SWL for solitary renal stone less than 20 mm. Post-SWL, patients were randomly divided into 2 groups; the tamsulosin group (TG), received a daily dose of tamsulosin 0.4 mg, for a maximum of 12 weeks, with post-SWL traditional analgesia and control group (CG), received the traditional analgesia alone.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 271 patients and eventually only 249 (123 in TG and 126 in CG) completed the study. The overall stone free rate was 73.5%: 78.0% in TG and 69.0% in CG (p = 0.108). In TG, 8.1% of patients experienced at least one episode of acute renal/ureteral colic compared with 19.8% of controls (p = 0.008). The mean cumulative analgesia dosage per subject was 313 mg in TG and 346 mg in CG (p < 0.001). Overall, 14 patients developed steinstrasse and 6 of them (all in CG) needed urgent intervention (p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Daily tamsulosin therapy does not enhance the clearance of stone fragments but decreases the pain episodes, analgesia dosage and need for adjuvant intervention after SWL for renal 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.

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.

Can the Hounsfield unit predict the success of medically expulsive therapy?

BACKGROUND

We investigate the predictability of medical expulsive therapy (MET) success with alpha blockers based on Hounsfield unit (HU) values and Hounsfield density (HD) values measured by computed tomography (CT) for distal ureteral stones.

METHODS

Between July 2011 and May 2012, 44 patients (19 female and 25 male) with 5- to 10-mm stones in the distal ureters were included in this randomized prospective study. Non-contrast CT examinations were performed in these patients. HU and HD values of stones were calculated. Doxazosine, 4 mg/day orally, was administered as a single dose to all patients for MET.

RESULTS

Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included 18 patients (43.9%) with dropped stones with MET. Group 2 included 23 patients (56.1%) with no stone passage with MET. In Group 1, the mean stone size was 7.7 mm, the mean HU was 507, and the HD was 53.04/mm. In Group 2, the mean stone size was 8.25 mm, the mean HU was 625, and the mean HD was 61.54/mm. The HU and HD values in Group 2 were higher than in Group 1. However, there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.85 and 0.93 for HU and HD, respectively).

INTERPRETATION

We found that HU and HD values cannot be used to predict the chances of success for MET. Although the sample size is appropriate for the study, further comparative studies involving more patients are warranted.

Do patients on alpha-blockers for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia have better results after shockwave lithotripsy of urinary stones?

PURPOSE

To investigate whether patients who are on alpha 1-adrenergic receptor (alpha 1-AR) antagonists for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) had better results after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL).

PATIENTS AND METHOD

We retrospectively reviewed the records of male patients older than 50 years who underwent SWL. Clinical characteristics, including the use of alpha 1-AR antagonists for BPH were analyzed. Mann-Whitney U test was used for data not normally distributed and student's t test for data normally distributed. The categorical variables were analyzed by the Chi-square test. A multiple logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the associations of variables on successful treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 264 renal units were treated. Complete stone clearance was achieved in 167 RUs (63.3%) and 28 RUs (10.6%) had clinically insignificant residual fragments. In 69 RUs (26.1%), SWL failed. More patients were on alpha 1-AR antagonists for BPH in the successfully treated group (p=0.028). The multivariate analysis revealed that the use of alpha 1-AR antagonists had significant effects on the success of SWL (p=0.047). SWL was performed to 34 RUs of 33 patients who were on alpha 1-AR antagonists and it was successful in 30 RUs (88.2%). In the remaining 230 RUs, stone-free state was achieved in 165 RUs (71.7%) (p=0.028). Stone-free rates were similar for patients on alfuzosine, tamsulosine, and doxazosine (p=0.310).

CONCLUSION

Patients who are being treated with alpha 1-AR antagonist agents for BPH have better results after SWL treatment, compared to patients not receiving alpha 1-AR antagonist. The improved results are independent of the type of alpha 1-AR antagonist.

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.

Calculating the number of shock waves, expulsion time, and optimum stone parameters based on noncontrast computerized tomography characteristics

OBJECTIVE

To define the parameters that accompanied a successful extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), namely the number of shock waves (SWs), expulsion time (ET), mean stone density (MSD), and the skin-to-stone distance (SSD).

METHODS

A total of 368 patients diagnosed with renal calculi using noncontrast computerized tomography had their MSD, diameter, and SSD recorded. All patients were treated using a Siemens lithotripter. ESWL success meant a stone-free status or presence of residual fragments <3 mm, ET was the time in days for the successful clearance of stone fragments. Correlation was performed between the stone characteristics, number of SWs, and ET. Two multiple regression analysis models defined the number of SWs and ET. Two receiver operating characteristic curves plotted the best MSD cutoff value and optimum SSD for a successful ESWL.

RESULTS

Three hundred one patients were ESWL successes. A significant positive correlation was elicited between number of SWs and stone diameter, density and SSD; between ET and stone diameter and density. Multiple regressions concluded 2 equations: Number of SWs = 265.108 + 5.103 x1 + 22.39 x2 + 10.931 x3 ET (days) = -10.85 + 0.031 x1 + 2.11 x2 x1 = stone density (Hounsfield unit [HUs]), x2 = stone diameter (mm), and x3 = SSD (mm). Receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrated a cutoff value of ≤ 934 HUs with 94.4% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity and P = .0211. The SSD curve showed that a distance ≤ 99 mm was 85.7% sensitive, 87.5% specific, P <.0001.

CONCLUSION

Stone disintegration is not recommended if MSD is >934 HUs and SSD >99 mm. The required number of SWs and the expected ET can be anticipated.

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.

Evaluation of outcome following lithotripsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is considered as an initial option for a significant proportion of urinary tract stones. Despite efforts for standardized terminology and methodology, published studies on lithotripsy outcome are very different. This review will focus on a brief description of evidence-based medicine and recent literature results on SWL outcome.

RECENT FINDINGS

The introduction of hierarchy in scientific evidence is becoming more widespread. Various grading systems have attempted to rank recommendations according to type and amount of evidence. Different levels of evidence have been created for therapy, diagnosis and prognosis. Various authors have developed scoring systems and identified radiographic parameters to predict SWL outcome. The long-term safety of lithotripsy on renal function has been demonstrated. Randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis have shown that medical expulsive therapy and a slower shockwave rate will improve SWL outcome.

SUMMARY

Evidence-based medicine is rapidly becoming an indispensable part of everyday medical practice. Common terminology is necessary for proper evaluation of SWL. Different types of studies are required to investigate efficacy, compare SWL to other options, complications and so on. Randomized clinical trials are of the highest value; matched-pair analyses and well designed controlled studies can offer significant help.

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.