Mohamed Mahmoud Dogha, Ismail Gamal A Sherif, Yasmin M Madney, Hadeer S Harb, Hoda Rabea
{"title":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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}
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.
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.
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.