Comparative study between silodosin, tamsulosin, silodosin plus tadalafil, and tamsulosin plus tadalafil as a medical expulsive therapy for lower ureteral stones: a prospective randomized trial.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
International Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-10 DOI:10.1007/s11255-024-04356-3
Mohamed Mahmoud Dogha, Ismail Gamal A Sherif, Yasmin M Madney, Hadeer S Harb, Hoda Rabea
{"title":"Comparative study between silodosin, tamsulosin, silodosin plus tadalafil, and tamsulosin plus tadalafil as a medical expulsive therapy for lower ureteral stones: a prospective randomized trial.","authors":"Mohamed Mahmoud Dogha, Ismail Gamal A Sherif, Yasmin M Madney, Hadeer S Harb, Hoda Rabea","doi":"10.1007/s11255-024-04356-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the safety and efficiency of a single-drug therapy with silodosin or tamsulosin versus combined therapy with silodosin plus tadalafil and tamsulosin plus tadalafil as a medical expulsive therapy (MET) for lower ureteral stones.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This research was a prospective randomized clinical trial carried out at Fayoum University Hospital, Egypt, over one year. Patients with lower ureteral stones (5-10 mm) were randomly allocated into one of four treatment groups. Group A received silodosin 8 mg per day; Group B received tamsulosin 0.4 mg per day; Group C received silodosin 8 mg plus tadalafil 5 mg daily, and Group D received tamsulosin 0.4 mg plus tadalafil 5 mg daily. Treatment was prescribed for up to 4 weeks. The study outcomes were the stone expulsion rate, stone expulsion time, the amount of analgesics used, the frequency of pain episodes, hospital visits, and any treatment-related adverse effects.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred eighty patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria completed the study. Group C had a significantly elevated stone expulsion rate (91.1%) compared to Group A (57.8%) and Group B (71.1%) [P = 0.015, P < 0.001, respectively]. Group D had a significantly elevated stone expulsion rate (86.7%) compared to Group B (57.8%) [P = 0.002] and higher than Group A (71.1%). Group C and Group D had significantly less stone expulsion time, analgesic needs, and episodes of renal colic, and fewer hospital visits than Group A and Group B. No significant differences were found in adverse effects like orthostatic hypotension, dizziness, backache, headache, myalgia, and nausea between the patient groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combining silodosin with tadalafil and tamsulosin with tadalafil was more efficient as MET for lower ureteric stones than a single treatment with silodosin or tamsulosin.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"1827-1833"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04356-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the safety and efficiency of a single-drug therapy with silodosin or tamsulosin versus combined therapy with silodosin plus tadalafil and tamsulosin plus tadalafil as a medical expulsive therapy (MET) for lower ureteral stones.

Methods: This research was a prospective randomized clinical trial carried out at Fayoum University Hospital, Egypt, over one year. Patients with lower ureteral stones (5-10 mm) were randomly allocated into one of four treatment groups. Group A received silodosin 8 mg per day; Group B received tamsulosin 0.4 mg per day; Group C received silodosin 8 mg plus tadalafil 5 mg daily, and Group D received tamsulosin 0.4 mg plus tadalafil 5 mg daily. Treatment was prescribed for up to 4 weeks. The study outcomes were the stone expulsion rate, stone expulsion time, the amount of analgesics used, the frequency of pain episodes, hospital visits, and any treatment-related adverse effects.

Results: One hundred eighty patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria completed the study. Group C had a significantly elevated stone expulsion rate (91.1%) compared to Group A (57.8%) and Group B (71.1%) [P = 0.015, P < 0.001, respectively]. Group D had a significantly elevated stone expulsion rate (86.7%) compared to Group B (57.8%) [P = 0.002] and higher than Group A (71.1%). Group C and Group D had significantly less stone expulsion time, analgesic needs, and episodes of renal colic, and fewer hospital visits than Group A and Group B. No significant differences were found in adverse effects like orthostatic hypotension, dizziness, backache, headache, myalgia, and nausea between the patient groups.

Conclusion: Combining silodosin with tadalafil and tamsulosin with tadalafil was more efficient as MET for lower ureteric stones than a single treatment with silodosin or tamsulosin.

西洛多辛、坦索罗辛、西洛多辛加他达拉非、坦索罗辛加他达拉非作为输尿管下段结石医学排出疗法的比较研究:一项前瞻性随机试验。
目的:探讨西洛多辛或坦索罗辛单药治疗与西洛多辛加他达拉非和坦索罗辛加他达拉非联合治疗输尿管下段结石的安全性和有效性。方法:本研究是在埃及法尤姆大学医院进行的一项为期一年的前瞻性随机临床试验。输尿管下段结石(5-10 mm)患者随机分为4个治疗组。A组给予西洛多辛8 mg / d;B组给予坦索罗辛0.4 mg / d;C组每日给予西洛多辛8 mg +他达拉非5 mg, D组每日给予坦索罗辛0.4 mg +他达拉非5 mg。治疗时间长达4周。研究结果包括结石排出率、结石排出时间、止痛药用量、疼痛发作频率、医院就诊次数和任何与治疗相关的不良反应。结果:180名符合纳入标准的患者完成了研究。C组结石排出率(91.1%)明显高于a组(57.8%)和B组(71.1%)[P = 0.015, P]结论:西洛多辛联合他达拉非、他达拉非与他达拉非联合治疗输尿管下段结石的MET效果优于西洛多辛或坦索罗辛单用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Urology and Nephrology
International Urology and Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
329
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信