Effect of Tamsulosin on Stone Passage for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

被引:36
|
作者
Wang, Ralph C. [1 ]
Smith-Bindman, Rebecca [2 ,3 ]
Whitaker, Evans [4 ]
Neilson, Jersey [1 ]
Allen, Isabel Elaine [3 ]
Stoller, Marshall L. [5 ]
Fahimi, Jahan [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Emergency Med, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Radiol & Biomed Imaging, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[3] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[4] Univ Calif San Francisco, UCSF Med Lib, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[5] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Urol, San Francisco, CA USA
基金
美国医疗保健研究与质量局;
关键词
DOUBLE-BLIND; MEDICAL THERAPY; MANAGEMENT; PLACEBO; FACILITATE; EFFICACY; CALCULI;
D O I
10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.06.044
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Study objective: Tamsulosin is recommended for patients receiving a diagnosis of a ureteral stone less than 10 mm who do not require immediate urologic intervention. Because of conflicting results from recent meta-analyses and large randomized controlled trials, the efficacy of tamsulosin is unclear. We perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of tamsulosin on stone passage in patients receiving a diagnosis of ureteral stone. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched without language restriction through November 2015 for studies assessing the efficacy of tamsulosin and using a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial design. Meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model and subgroup analyses were conducted to determine sources of heterogeneity. Results: Eight randomized controlled trials (N=1,384) contained sufficient information for inclusion. The pooled risk of stone passage in the tamsulosin arm was 85% versus 66% in the placebo arm, but substantial heterogeneity existed across trials (/2=80.2%; P<.001). After stratifying of studies by stone size, the meta-analysis of the large stone subgroup (5 to 10 mm; N=514) indicated a benefit of tamsulosin (risk difference=22%; 95% confidence interval 12% to 33%; number needed to treat=5). The meta-analysis of the small stone subgroup (<4 to 5 mm; N=533) indicated no benefit (risk difference=-0.3%; 95% confidence interval-4% to 3%). Neither meta-analysis for the occurrence of dizziness or hypotension showed a significant effect. Conclusion: Tamsulosin significantly improves stone passage in patients with larger stones, whereas the effect of tamsulosin is diminished in those with smaller stones, who are likely to pass their stone regardless of treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:353 / 361
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Is tamsulosin effective for the passage of symptomatic ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Sun, Yi
    Lei, Guo-Lin
    Yang, Lu
    Wei, Qiang
    Wei, Xin
    MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (10)
  • [2] THIS TOO SHALL PASS: AN UPDATED SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF TAMSULOSIN ON RATES OF DISTAL URETERAL STONE PASSAGE
    Stensland, Kristian
    Malinconico, Larry
    Zhang, Lawrence
    Canes, David
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E410 - E411
  • [3] Tamsulosin for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial
    Lu, Zeping
    Dong, Zhilong
    Ding, Hui
    Wang, Hanzhang
    Ma, Baoliang
    Wang, Zhiping
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2012, 89 (01) : 107 - 115
  • [4] Tamsulosin versus nifedipine to facilitate urinary stone passage: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhang, Yongqiang
    Yuan, Dongbo
    Rao, Haofu
    Cheng, Tianfei
    Luan, Boshi
    Wang, Wei
    Su, Jiaming
    Wang, Yuanlin
    Sun, Zhaolin
    Ouyang, Guiping
    Zhu, Jianguo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2018, 11 (03): : 1458 - 1466
  • [5] Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Hsu, Yuan-Pin
    Hsu, Chin-Wang
    Bai, Chyi-Huey
    Cheng, Sheng-Wei
    Chen, Kuan-Chou
    Chen, Chiehfeng
    PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (08):
  • [6] Comparison of silodosin to tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Mehmet Özsoy
    Evangelos Liatsikos
    Nicolas Scheffbuch
    Panagiotis Kallidonis
    Urolithiasis, 2016, 44 : 491 - 497
  • [7] Comparison of silodosin to tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Oezsoy, Mehmet
    Liatsikos, Evangelos
    Scheffbuch, Nicolas
    Kallidonis, Panagiotis
    UROLITHIASIS, 2016, 44 (06) : 491 - 497
  • [8] Comment on “Comparison of silodosin to tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis”
    Salvatore Butticè
    Emre Sener
    Rosa Pappalardo
    Carlo Magno
    Urolithiasis, 2016, 44 : 499 - 500
  • [9] Comment on "Comparison of silodosin to tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis"
    Buttice, Salvatore
    Sener, Emre
    Pappalardo, Rosa
    Magno, Carlo
    UROLITHIASIS, 2016, 44 (06) : 499 - 500
  • [10] Tamsulosin as a Medical Expulsive Therapy for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Bayne, David B.
    Chi, Thomas
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (05): : 955 - 955