Medical expulsive therapy using alfuzosin for patient presenting with ureteral stone less than 10mm: a prospective randomized controlled trial

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

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

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones

BACKGROUND

Ureteral colic is a common reason for patients to seek medical care. Alpha-blockers are commonly used to improve stone passage through so-called medical expulsive therapy (MET), but their effectiveness remains controversial. This is an update of a 2014 Cochrane review; since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of alpha-blockers compared with standard therapy for ureteral stones 1 cm or smaller confirmed by imaging in adult patients presenting with symptoms of ureteral stone disease.

SEARCH METHODS

On 18 November 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, and Embase. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO Portal/ICTRP to identify all published/unpublished and ongoing trials. We checked all references of included and review articles and conference proceedings for articles relevant to this review. We sent letters to investigators to request information about unpublished or incomplete studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of ureteral stone passage in adult patients that compared alpha-blockers versus standard therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened studies for inclusion and extracted data using standard methodological procedures. We performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were stone clearance and major adverse events; secondary outcomes were stone expulsion time, number of pain episodes, use of diclofenac, hospitalisation, and surgical intervention. We assessed the quality of evidence on a per-outcome basis using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 67 studies with 10,509 participants overall. Of these, 15 studies with 5787 participants used a placebo.Stone clearance: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may result in a large increase in stone clearance (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 1.55; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that the likely effect is probably smaller (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 116 more (95% CI 51 more to 182 more) stone clearances per 1000 participants.Major adverse events: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may have little effect on major adverse events (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.96; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that alpha-blockers likely increase the risk of major adverse events slightly (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.86), corresponding to 29 more (95% CI 3 more to 75 more) major adverse events per 1000 participants.Patients treated with alpha-blockers may experience shorter stone expulsion times (mean difference (MD) -3.40 days, 95% CI -4.17 to -2.63; low-quality evidence), may use less diclofenac (MD -82.41, 95% CI -122.51 to -42.31; low-quality evidence), and likely require fewer hospitalisations (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 69 fewer hospitalisations (95% CI 93 fewer to 32 fewer) per 1000 participants. Meanwhile, the need for surgical intervention appears similar (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; low-quality evidence), corresponding to 28 fewer surgical interventions (95% CI 51 fewer to 2 more) per 1000 participants.A predefined subgroup analysis (test for subgroup differences; P = 0.002) suggests that effects of alpha-blockers may vary with stone size, with RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.15; P = 0.16; I² = 62%) for stones 5 mm or smaller versus 1.45 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.72; P < 0.0001; I² = 59%) for stones larger than 5 mm. We found no evidence suggesting possible subgroup effects based on stone location or alpha-blocker type.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For patients with ureteral stones, alpha-blockers likely increase stone clearance but probably also slightly increase the risk of major adverse events. Subgroup analyses suggest that alpha-blockers may be less effective for smaller (5 mm or smaller) than for larger stones (greater than 5 mm).

Comparative efficacy of tamsulosin versus tadalafil as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones

Objective:

The objective of this study was to compare the relative efficacy of tamsulosin and tadalafil as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones.

Patients and Methods:

This was a prospective study performed between December 2014 and February 2016. A total of 123 adult patients (>18 years of age) presenting with distal ureteric stones sized 6–10 mm were randomized to treatment with tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily (Group A) or tadalafil10 mg once daily (Group B). Therapy was given for a maximum of 4 weeks. The stone expulsion rate was the primary endpoint. Time to stone expulsion, number of colic episodes, analgesic use, number of hospital visits for pain, endoscopic treatment, and adverse effects of the drugs were noted. Statistical analyses were done using Fisher's exact test and Chi-square test.

Results:

A total of 61 patients were included in tamsulosin group and 62 patients in tadalafil group. A statistically insignificant difference was found for stone clearance rate between both groups as a whole (Group A-73.77%, Group B-69.35%, P = 0.690) as well as when we considered both subgroups (A1-78.05%, B1-75.0%, P = 0.802; A2-65.0%, B2-55.6%, P = 0.741). All the primary and secondary outcome measures were more in favour of stones ≤8 mm size than stones >8 mm size. No statistical difference was found for adverse drug effects except for retrograde ejaculation, which was significantly high in tamsulosin group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion:

This study showed that although tamsulosin is more effective for stone clearance than tadalafil, but this difference was not significant (P = 0.690).

Relationship Between Ureteral Jet Flow, Visual Analogue Scale, and Ureteral Stone Size

OBJECTIVE

To contribute to the diagnosis and treatment of ureteral stones by investigating the relationship between the ureteral jet flow measurements of patients with ureteral stones and the size of the stones and the patients' pain scores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The sample consisted of patients who presented acute renal colic between December 2014 and 2015 and from a noncontrast computed tomography were found to have a urinary stone. The ureteral jet flow velocities were determined using Doppler ultrasonography. The patients were all assessed in terms of stone size, localization and area, anteroposterior pelvis (AP) diameter, and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients were included in the study. As the VAS score decreased, the peak jet flow velocity on the stone side increased, whereas the flow velocity on the other side, AP diameter, and stone area were reduced (P < .05). As the stone size increased, the peak jet flow velocity was reduced and the AP diameter increased significantly (P < .05). Ureteral jet flow was not observed in 17 patients on the stone side. A statistically significant difference was found between these patients and the remaining patients in terms of all parameters (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

For patients, in whom the peak flow velocity of ureteral jet is low and with a severe level of pain or the peak flow velocity of ureteral jet cannot be measured, there is a low possibility of spontaneous passage and a high possibility of a large stone, and therefore the treatment should be started immediately.

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

INTRODUCTION

Effective medical expulsion for ureteric stones with α-blockers offers numerous advantages over surgical alternatives. However, its effectiveness remains uncertain and with the publication of new trial data, the available evidence requires reappraisal.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of α-blockers the management of ureteric lithiasis.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature, with predefined search criteria, was conducted using PubMed and Embase. All randomised trials comparing α-blocker monotherapy to placebo or standard therapy were included. Stone expulsion rate was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were time to stone expulsion, analgesic usage and pain scores. Subgroup analyses assessed individual adrenergic antagonists and variations in standard therapy. Sensitivity analysis was based on stone location, stone size, Cochrane Risk of Bias score and study protocol. Summary effects were calculated using a random-effect model and presented as Relative risks (RR) and mean differences (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcome measures, respectively.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies randomising 6654 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Stone expulsion rates improved with α-blockers (RR, 1.49; 95% CI 1.38-1.61). Contrast enhanced funnel showed evidence of publication bias. Stone expulsion time was 3.99 days (CI -4.75 to -3.23) shorter with α-blockers. Similarly, patients required 106.53 mg [CI -148.20 to -64.86] less diclofenac compared with control/placebo, and had 0.80 [CI -1.07 to -0.54] fewer pain episodes. Visual Analogue Scores were also reduced, -2.43 [CI -3.87 to -0.99]. All formulations of α-antagonists all demonstrated beneficial effects over conservative treatment/placebo. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated significant effects of stone location, stone size and study design.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Despite the opposing results of recently published trial, current evidence continues to demonstrate a potential benefit of α-blocker treatment particularly for distal stones over 5 mm.

The effect of alfuzosin on renal resistive index, urinary electrolytes and β2 microglobulin levels and TGF β-1 levels of kidney tissue in rats with unilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction

BACKGROUND

In this study, it was aimed to determine the effects of alfuzosin on experimentally generated unilateral partial ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPO) in rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty Long-Evans rats were randomly allocated into five groups. In control group (C), nothing was performed; in group Sham (S) only laparotomy was done; in Alfuzosin group (A) only alfuzosin was administered for two weeks (10 mg/kg/day p.o.) without any surgery; in UPO group, unilateral UP junction obstruction was produced; and in the Group UPT (ureteropelvic obstruction + treatment), alfuzosin was administered for two weeks (10 mg/kg/day p.o.) in addition to UPO production. Renal pelvic anteroposterior diameters were determined with ultrasonography (USG) and renal arterial resistivity indexes by color Doppler USG. Urine was collected both at the beginning and at the end of the experiment for 24 h in all the groups and at the end of the experiment, blood samples were obtained. Blood and urine electrolytes and TGF-β1, urine density, urine β2 microglobulin levels were determined. Renal tissue samples harvested from all of the rats were histopathologically evaluated. Results were determined using one-way ANOVA t-test; p < 0.05 was accepted as significant.

RESULTS

Urine density in the UPT group was lower with respect to UPO group and blood electrolytes were preserved as close to normal (p < 0.05). In the UPT group, urine TGF-β1 and blood TGF-β1, blood β2 microglobulin levels and histopathologic damage scores were lower compared to the UPO group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

It is shown in this experimental unilateral partial UPO model that alfuzosin treatment prevents obstructive renal damage.

Outcome of α-blockers, with or without methylprednisolone combination, in medical expulsive therapy for lower ureteric stones: A prospective randomised study

Objectives

To compare the safety and efficacy of tamsulosin, alfuzosin, and their combinations with methylprednisolone, in the medical management of lower ureteric stones.

Patients and methods

Between September 2012 and June 2014, patients diagnosed with a single lower ureteric stone of ⩽10 mm (longest dimension) were enrolled. Patients with urinary tract infection, severe hydronephrosis, pregnancy, hypertension, diabetes, ulcer disease, or renal insufficiency were excluded. According to the medication added to the analgesic anti-inflammatory, patients were stratified into four groups, with 53 patients in each. Group I patients received tamsulosin 0.4 mg and those in Group II received tamsulosin 0.4 mg and methylprednisolone 8 mg. Group III patients received alfuzosin 10 mg and those in Group IV received alfuzosin 10 mg and methylprednisolone 8 mg. Treatment was continued until stone expulsion or to a maximum of 2 weeks. The patients’ demographics, stone criteria, and stone-free rates were calculated and analysed.

Results

The mean (SD) maximum stone dimension was 7.8 (1.5), 8.1 (1.3), 7.9 (1.6) and 8.0 (1.4) mm in Groups I, II, III and IV, respectively. Groups II and IV had significantly higher stone-free rates than Groups I and III (P < 0.05), whilst there were no statistically significant differences between Groups I and III or between Groups II and IV. There was no statistical difference among the four groups for the time to stone expulsion. Three patients in Group II and two patients in Group IV developed transient hyperglycaemia, which resolved after cessation of methylprednisolone.

Conclusions

The combination of alfuzosin or tamsulosin with methylprednisolone seems to be effective and safe for managing lower ureteric stones of <1 cm.

Efficacy and Safety of Alfuzosin as Medical Expulsive Therapy for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Alfuzosin has been widely used to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatitis, and is claimed to be a selective agent for the lower urinary tract with low incidence of adverse side-effects and hypotensive changes. Recently, several randomized controlled trials have reported using Alfuzosin as an expulsive therapy of ureteral stones. Tamsulosin, another alpha blocker, has also been used as an agent for the expulsive therapy for ureteral stones. It is unclear whether alfuzosin has similar efficacy as Tamsulosin in the management of ureteral stones.

Objective

To perform a systematic review and analysis of literatures comparing Alfuzosin with Tamsulosin or standard conservative therapy for the treatment of ureteral stones less than 10 mm in diameter.

Methods

A systematic literature review was performed in December 2014 using Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane library databases to identify relevant studies. All randomized and controlled trials were included. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing Alfuzosin with control therapy on the management of distal ureteral stones.

Results

Alfuzosin provided a significantly higher stone-free rate than the control treatments (RR: 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35–2.55; p<0.001), and a shorter stone expulsion time (Weighted mean difference [WMD]: -4.20 d, 95%CI, -6.19 to -2.21; p<0.001), but it has a higher complication rate (RR: 2.02; 95% CI, 1.30–3.15; p<0.01). When Alfuzosin was compared to Tamsulosin, there was no significant difference in terms of stone-free rate (RR: 0.90; 95% CI, 0.79–1.02; p = 0.09) as well as the stone expulsion time (WMD: 0.52 d, 95%CI, -1.61 to 2.64; p = 0.63). The adverse effects of Alfuzosin were similar to those of Tamsulosin (RR: 0.88; 95% CI, 0.61–1.26; p = 0.47).

Conclusions

Alfuzosin is a safe and effective agent for the expulsive therapy of ureteral stones smaller than 10 mm in size. It is more effective than therapeutic regiment without alpha blocker. It is equivalent to Tamsulosin in its effectiveness and safety profile. Adverse effects should always be kept in mind when use this class of drugs.

Multicenter, prospective, comparative cohort study evaluating the efficacy and safety of alfuzosin 10 mg with regard to blood pressure in men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia with or without antihypertensive medications

Background

The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of alfuzosin 10 mg monotherapy or combined antihypertensive medication on blood pressure (BP) in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH/LUTS) with or without antihypertensive medication.

Methods

This was a 3-month, multicenter, randomized, open-label study in 335 patients aged ≥45 years with a clinical diagnosis of BPH/LUTS by medical history and clinical examination, a total International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) ≥8 points, a maximum flow rate >5 mL/sec and ≤15 mL/sec, and a voided volume ≥120 mL. Eligible subjects were randomized to receive alfuzosin 10 mg as monotherapy (group 1) or alfuzosin 10 mg + antihypertensive combination therapy (group 2). Based on baseline BP and hypertensive history with or without antihypertensive medications at first medical examination, group 1 was divided into two subgroups of normotensive and untreated hypertensive patients, and group 2 into two subgroups of controlled hypertensive and uncontrolled hypertensive patients. The primary study outcomes were change in IPSS, BP, and heart rate from baseline. Secondary outcomes were change in IPSS-quality of life score, maximum flow rate, average flow rate, voided volume, and post-voided volume.

Results

The overall BP change was not significantly different between groups 1 and 2 (systolic BP, P=0.825; diastolic BP, P>0.999). In patients with uncontrolled or untreated hypertension, alfuzosin 10 mg alone or combined with antihypertensive therapy significantly decreased systolic and diastolic BP. The mean difference in total IPSS and IPSS-quality of life scores from baseline between groups 1 and 2 was 0.45 (95% CI: −1.26, 2.16) and 0.12 (95% CI: −0.21, 0.45), respectively (both P>0.05). Maximum flow rate, average flow rate, voided volume, and post-voided volume at endpoint were numerically, but not significantly, changed from baseline (all P>0.05).

Conclusion

This study shows that alfuzosin 10 mg is effective and well tolerated in patients with BPH/LUTS with or without antihypertensive medications. However, in patients with uncontrolled or untreated hypertension, alfuzosin 10 mg alone or in combination with antihypertensive medication appears to decrease systolic and diastolic BP, and these patients should be warned about a decrease in BP on initiation of therapy.

Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones

BACKGROUND

Urinary stone disease is one of the most common reasons for patients visiting a urology practice, affecting about 5% to 10% of the population. Annual costs for stone disease have rapidly increased over the years and most patients with ureteral colic or other symptoms seek medical care. Stone size and location are important predictors of stone passage. In most cases medical expulsive therapy is an appropriate treatment modality and most studies have been performed with alpha-blockers. Alpha-blockers tend to decrease intra-ureteral pressure and increase fluid passage which might increase stone passage. Faster stone expulsion will decrease the rate of complications, the need for invasive interventions and eventually decrease healthcare costs. A study on the effect of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy in ureteral stones is therefore warranted.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to answer the following question: does medical treatment with alpha-blockers compared to other pharmacotherapy or placebo impact on stone clearance rate, in adult patients presenting with symptoms of ureteral stones less than 10 mm confirmed by imaging? Other clinically relevant outcomes such as stone expulsion time, hospitalisation, pain scores, analgesic use and adverse effects have also been explored.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 9 July 2012 through contact with the Trials Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, handsearching conference proceedings, and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), comparing alpha-blockers with other pharmacotherapy or placebo on ureteral stone passage in adult patients were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Reporting bias was investigated using funnel plots. Subgroup analysis was used to explore possible sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis was performed removing studies of poor methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two studies (5864 participants) were included. The stone-free rates were significantly higher in the alpha-blocker group (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.64) when compared to standard therapy. Stone expulsion time was 2.91 days shorter with the use of alpha-blockers (MD -2.91, 95% CI -4.00 to -1.81). Use of alpha-blockers reduced the number of pain episodes (MD -0.48, 95% CI -0.94 to -0.01), the need for analgesic medication (diclofenac) (MD -38.17 mg, 95% CI -74.93 to -1.41) and hospitalisation (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.97). Patients using alpha-blockers were more likely to experience adverse effects when compared to standard therapy (RR 2.74, 95% CI 1.38 to 5.45) or placebo (RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.50 to 4.96). Most adverse effects were mild of origin and did not lead to cessation of therapy, and several studies reported no adverse events in either the treatment or control group.In 7/32 studies patients and doctors were both blinded. In the other studies blinding was not described in the methods or no blinding had taken place. Two studies described incomplete data and only one study showed a relatively high number of patients who withdrew from the study. These factors limited the methodological strength of the evidence found.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of alpha-blockers in patients with ureteral stones results in a higher stone-free rate and a shorter time to stone expulsion. Alpha-blockers should therefore be offered as part of medical expulsive therapy as one of the primary treatment modalities.

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.

Factors predicting success of emergency extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (eESWL) in ureteric calculi--a single centre experience from the United Kingdom (UK)

Few studies show that "emergency extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (eESWL)" reduces the incidence of ureteroscopy in patients with ureteric calculi. We assess success of eESWL and look to study and identify factors which predict successful outcome. We retrospectively studied patients presenting with their first episode of ureteric colic undergoing eESWL (within 72 h of presentation) over a 5-year period. Patient's age, gender, stone size and location, time between presentation and ESWL, number of shock waves and ESWL sessions, and Hounsfield units (HU) were recorded. 97 patients (mean age 40 years; 76 males, 21 females) were included. 71 patients were stone free after eESWL (73.2 %) (group 1) and 26 patients failed treatment and proceeded to ureteroscopy (group 2). The two groups were well matched for age and gender. Mean stone size in group 1 and 2 was 6.4 mm and 7.7 mm, respectively, (p = 0.00141). Stone location was 34, 21, and 16 in upper, middle and lower ureter in group 1 compared to 11, 5, and 10 in group 2, respectively. Mean HU in group 1 was 480 and 612 in group 2 (p value 0.0036). In group 2, significantly, more patients received treatment after 24 h compared with group 1 (38 vs 22.5 %). The number of shock waves, maximal intensity, and ESWL sessions were not significantly different in the two groups. No complications were noted. eESWL is safe and effective in patients with ureteric colic. Stone size and Hounsfield units are important factors in predicting success. Early treatment (≤24 h) minimizes stone impaction and increases the success rate of ESWL.

Efficacy and safety of tamsulosin vs. alfuzosin as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the efficacy of tamsulosin and alfuzosin as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 112 patients with ureteric stones of ⩽10 mm, located along the ureter, were randomly divided into three groups. In group I, 32 patients received no α-blockers (controls), in group II 40 patients received tamsulosin 0.4 mg daily, and in group III 40 patients received alfuzosin 10 mg daily. All patients were given analgesia and antibiotics when indicated. The follow-up was weekly for 4 weeks.

RESULTS

The mean stone size and age were comparable in the three groups. The stone expulsion rate was 44%, 85% and 75% in groups I, II and III, respectively. Half of the stones in group II passed within 2 weeks, half in group III passed within 3 weeks, while more than half of the stones in group I did not pass even after 4 weeks. The mean number of painful episodes was 2.45, 1.38 and 1.64 in groups I, II and III, respectively. The drug-related side-effects reported by patients were mild and transient.

CONCLUSION

The use of tamsulosin or alfuzosin as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones in the three sections of the ureter (upper, middle and lower) was safe and effective, as shown by the increased overall stone expulsion rate, reduced stone expulsion time and fewer pain episodes. Tamsulosin was associated with a greater rate of stone expulsion than was alfuzosin.

Efficacy of alfuzosin after shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of ureteral calculi

PURPOSE

We evaluated the efficacy of alfuzosin for the treatment of ureteral calculi less than 10 mm in diameter after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized, single-blind clinical trial was performed prospectively by one physician between June 2010 and August 2011. A total of 84 patients with ureteral calculi 5 to 10 mm in diameter were divided into two groups. Alfuzosin 10 mg (once daily) and loxoprofen sodium 68.1 mg (as needed) were prescribed to group 1 (n=41), and loxoprofen sodium 68.1 mg (as needed) only was prescribed to group 2 (n=44). The drug administration began immediately after ESWL and continued until stone expulsion was confirmed up to a maximum of 42 days after the procedure.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine of 41 (95.1%) patients in group 1 and 40 of 43 (93.0%) patients in group 2 ultimately passed stones (p=0.96). The number of ESWL sessions was 1.34±0.65 and 1.41±0.85 in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=0.33). The patients who required analgesics after ESWL were 8 (19.5%) in group 1 and 13 (30.2%) in group 2 (p=0.31). Visual analogue scale pain severity scores were 5.33±1.22 and 6.43±1.36 in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p=0.056). The time to stone expulsion in groups 1 and 2 was 9.5±4.8 days and 14.7±9.8 days, respectively (p=0.005). No significant adverse effects occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of alfuzosin in combination with ESWL seems to facilitate stone passage and to reduce the time of stone expulsion but does not affect the stone-free rate.

Effects of alfuzosin with methylprednisolone for spontaneous expulsion and pain control of lower ureteral stone

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of alfuzosin with methylprednisolone on expulsion and pain control of lower ureteral stones <10 mm in size. Between June 2005 and June 2007, 113 patients with lower ureteral stones <10 mm in size were enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into a control group (group I) and medical expulsive therapy group (group II). Group I (n = 66) received oral analgesics daily and group II (n = 47) received the same analgesics along with 10 mg alfuzosin and 8 mg methylprednisolone for 4 weeks orally once a day. The treatment was continued until stone expulsion or to a maximum of 4 weeks. All patients were allowed 25 mg pethidine hydrochloride intramuscular injections if needed for suboptimal pain control. The average stone size was 6.15 mm in group I and 5.42 mm in group II. Of the 113 patients, 80 became stone free (70.7%). Group II had significantly higher stone free rates (82.9 vs. 62.1%, p = 0.014), fewer expulsion times (mean 4.4 vs. 7.3 days, p = 0.001), and mean number of intramuscular analgesic injections (0.8 vs. 2.1) compared to group I. Alfuzosin with methylprednisolone treatment seems safe and effective for lower ureteral stones <10 mm in size as demonstrated by the increased stone free rate, earlier expulsion, and reduced additional analgesic therapy.

Medical management of renal stone

Kidney stone is a common clinical problem faced by clinicians. The prevalence of the disease is increasing worldwide. As the affected population is getting younger and recurrence rates are high, dietary modifications, lifestyle changes, and medical management are essential. Patients with recurrent stone disease need careful evaluation for underlying metabolic disorder. Medical management should be used judiciously in all patients with kidney stones, with appropriate individualization. This chapter focuses on medical management of kidney stones.