Tamsulosin for treatment of unilateral distal ureterolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Pooled-analysis of tadalafil and tamsulosin for ureteral calculi

Objective

Urolithiasis is a common urological diseases and affects the daily life of patients. Medical expulsive therapy has become acceptable for many parents. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of tadalafil compared with tamsulosin for treating distal ureteral stones less than 10 mm in length.

Methods

Related studies were identified via searches of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. All the articles that described the use of tadalafil and tamsulosin for treating distal ureteral stones were collected.

Results

A total of 14 studies were included in our meta-analysis. Our results revealed that tadalafil enhanced expulsion rate [odds ratio (OR) = 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47 to 0.98, p = 0.04]; reduced expulsion time [mean difference (MD) = 1.22, 95% CI (0.13, 2.30), p = 0.03]; lowered analgesia use [MD = 38.66, 95% CI (7.56, 69.77), p = 0.01] and hospital visits [MD = 0.14, 95% CI (0.06, 0.22), p = 0.0006]. According to our subgroup analysis, either tadalafil 5 mg or 10 mg did not promote expulsion rate and accelerate expulsion time compared with tamsulosin. But patients receiving 5 mg tadalafil decreased analgesia usage [MD = 101.04, 95% CI (67.56, 134.01), p < 0.00001].

Conclusion

Compared with tamsulosin, tadalafil demonstrates a higher expulsion rate and less expulsion time for patients with distal ureteral stones less than 10 mm with a favorable safety profile.

Tamsulosin dispensation patterns in the United States: a real-world, longitudinal, population claims database analysis

Background

Tamsulosin remains the single most popular uroselective alpha adrenoceptor antagonist approved for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) attributable to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Over the last 3 decades, the utilization of tamsulosin has extended to conditions beyond its original indication. To identify potential changes to prescribing patterns and the extent of tamsulosin use for conditions beyond its original indication, we evaluated tamsulosin dispensing patterns in the United States using a large, multi-payer claims database.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis using IMS PharMetrics Plus™. Patients with a tamsulosin dispensation/BPH diagnosis code (index dates), identified during a 12-month selection period (October 2012-September 2013), were included if continuously enrolled in a health plan during the 18-month analysis period (12 months pre-index-6 months post-index). Patient and provider characteristics were evaluated using descriptive statistics and were contrasted with previously reported data from the literature.

Results

Of 133,977 patients dispensed tamsulosin during the analysis period, 72,583 (54.2%) were new users [59,197 (81.6%) men; 13,386 (18.4%) women]. Tamsulosin was newly initiated in men and women mostly by primary care physicians (PCPs; 31.6%) and emergency medicine physicians (21.6%). During the analysis period, 35,071 (59.2%) male new tamsulosin users did not receive a BPH diagnosis code during the analysis period. Of 199,468 men with a BPH diagnosis code, 143,444 (71.9%) were newly diagnosed, mostly [70,412 (49.1%)] by urologists. Few men received hypotension diagnosis: 252 (0.4%) new tamsulosin users within 1 month of starting tamsulosin and 640 (0.4%) within 1 month of a new BPH diagnosis.

Conclusions

Tamsulosin was prescribed in patients without a recorded diagnosis of BPH and in women. Physicians were comfortable prescribing tamsulosin in the presence of comorbidity and polypharmacy, and PCPs and emergency medicine physicians were the primary prescribers. These results have important implications for future retrospective research for tamsulosin.

Safety of Tamsulosin: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials with a Focus on Women and Children

INTRODUCTION

Although tamsulosin is indicated for the treatment of the signs and symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), it has also been assessed in clinical studies for other conditions/symptoms and in other populations such as women and children. In this systematic review of randomized studies, the overall safety of tamsulosin was assessed, focusing on these understudied populations.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted using Embase, Medline, and PubMed (inception-December 2015). A study was included if patients were randomized to receive treatment with any dose of tamsulosin capsules, tablets, or an oral controlled absorption system and numerical safety results were reported.

RESULTS

Overall, 160 articles involving 46,072 participants met the inclusion criteria. Of these, four studies included women only and three included children. The mean [standard deviation (SD)] age ranged from 7.3 (4.2) to 76.8 (7.1) years. The studies (n; %) evaluated healthy subjects (18; 11%) or patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/BPH (90; 56%), ureteral stones/renal colic (42; 26%), prostatitis (4; 3%), or other conditions (6; 4%). Patients discontinued tamsulosin primarily because of adverse events (AEs) or insufficient response. AEs in women and children were abdominal pain, asthenia, constipation, dizziness, dry mouth, drowsiness, dyspepsia, headache, incontinence, nasal congestion, nausea, orthostatic hypotension, and somnolence. Due to heterogeneity across studies, statistical analysis could not be conducted.

DISCUSSION

No unexpected AEs were observed in an all-comers population treated with tamsulosin for various conditions/symptoms. The overall safety profile in women and children seemed to be generally consistent with the profile in men, the indicated population.

[CLINICAL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH SPONTANEOUS PASSAGE OF URETER STONES IN CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT: 6 mm IN MAXIMAL STONE SIZE MEASURED BY ULTRASONOGRAPHY CAN BE A PREDICTIVE BORDER]

(Purpose) To date there was no consensus regarding expectant size of stone and time to expulsion in the conservative treatment of ureter stones. The aim of this study was to find the clinical factors associated with stone passage by evaluating the outcome of ureter stones with expectant management in Japanese. (Materials and methods) A total of 679 ureter stone cases who visited our hospital with acute real colic and/or hematuria between 2009 and 2013, and who had decided to be treated by expectant management with or without medical expulsive therapy were enrolled in this study. All cases were examined size, location and presence of stone, and degree of hydronephrosis with ultrasonography. The examined data plus clinical data such as gender, age, side and body mass index were analyzed to find the factors related to spontaneous passage of ureter stones. Statistical analysis was performed to predict whether the factors were associated with the ureteral stone expulsion or not. (Results) Accumulated residual stone curve using Kaplan-Meier method showed time to 50%-expulsion as 15.7 days in cases with stone size no more than 6.0 mm and that as 21.8 days in those with greater than 6.0 mm, and time to 50%-expulsion as 28.8 days in cases with upper ureter stone whereas 15.6 days in those with middle or distal ureter stone. Analysis in groups with 1 mm-interval in stone size showed statistical significance only when compared 5-6 mm group with 6-7 mm group in size. Multivariate analysis showed stone size and location as statistically significant and independent factors to predict time to expulsion within 30 days. (Conclusion) Stone size and location was statistically reconfirmed to be associated with spontaneous passage in expectant management of ureter stones. This study statistically demonstrated the possibility that 6 mm in maximal stone size measured by ultrasonography can be a predictive border. 75% of ureter stones within 6 mm in maximal size measured by ultrasonography may expect to be expelled within 30 days.