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

The efficacy and safety of alpha-adrenergic blockers for medical expulsion therapy in patients with ureteral calculi: A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials

PURPOSE

Alpha-adrenergic blockers are commonly used as a medical expulsive therapy (MET) for patients with ureteral calculi. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of alpha-adrenergic blockers compared with a placebo when used as a MET.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases, and the Cochrane Library, for relevant articles from inception to November 2020. Our aim was to identify placebo-controlled trails in which patients were randomized to receive either alpha-adrenergic blockers (tamsulosin, alfuzosin, doxazosin, terazosin, naftopidil, or silodosin) or a placebo for the treatment of ureteral calculi.

RESULTS

According to strict inclusion criteria, database searches identified 8 placebo-controlled studies that included 2284 patients. Generally, α-blockers had no significant effect on the clearance of stones in the urinary tract (risk ratio [RR] = 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00-1.11). However, subgroup analysis showed that α-blockers were effective in treating distal urinary tract stones (RR = 1.08; 95% CI = 1.02-1.15). With regards to adverse events, our analysis showed that the combination of MET with α-blockers was likely to cause dizziness (RR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.06-1.79) and retrograde ejaculation (RR = 3.10; 95% CI = 1.81-5.29).

CONCLUSION

Although α-blockers cannot improve the overall ureteral stone clearance rate, these drugs are still effective for the treatment of stones in the distal urinary tract. However, the application of α-blockers is likely to cause dizziness and/or retrograde ejaculation.

Efficacy of Naftopidil as a Medical Expulsive Therapy in Japanese Men With Ureteral Stones: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study

Background

Naftopidil combined with an antispasmodic agent and a supplement that facilitates stone expulsion has reportedly produced an increased rate of ureteral stone expulsion. A randomized controlled study was conducted to determine the efficacy of naftopidil as a medical expulsive therapy for male patients with ureteral stones.

Methods

Male patients (n = 500) with stones from the upper to the lower ureter were randomized to one of four groups and followed for 1 month to assess spontaneous passage of stones. The control group received only analgesics. The other three groups received daily doses of 240 mg flopropione, an antispasmodic agent and 1,350 mg extract of Quercus salicina Blume/Quercus stenophylla Makino (QS), a supplement that facilitates stone expulsion; 50 mg naftopidil; or 50 mg naftopidil in combination with 240 mg flopropione and 1,350 mg QS. Stone expulsion and characteristics were evaluated by urinalysis; kidney, ureter and bladder X-ray; ultrasound; and computed tomography.

Results

The probability of expulsion of ureteral stones < 6 mm increased 1.570-fold (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.039 - 2.374, P < 0.05) with naftopidil compared to control; the probability of expulsion of a lower ureteral stone < 6 mm increased 1.778-fold (95% CI: 1.066 - 2.965, P < 0.05) with naftopidil compared to control. None of the stones > 6 mm spontaneously passed.

Conclusions

For relatively small ureteral stones < 6 mm, analgesic treatment combined with naftopidil would be the first choice. However, for relatively large ureteral stones > 6 mm, it appears that analgesia is sufficient for initial treatment of ureteral stone.

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).