索非那新和坦索罗新缓解支架相关症状的比较疗效:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Narra J Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-21 DOI:10.52225/narra.v5i2.1683
Dianita H Harahap, Kharisma P Adhyatma, Elbert Elbert, Felix Khosasi, Muhammad H Warli
{"title":"索非那新和坦索罗新缓解支架相关症状的比较疗效:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Dianita H Harahap, Kharisma P Adhyatma, Elbert Elbert, Felix Khosasi, Muhammad H Warli","doi":"10.52225/narra.v5i2.1683","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ureteral stents, commonly used in urology, can cause side effects affecting patient quality of life. However, studies on managing lower urinary tract symptoms showed inconsistencies due to the use of various alpha-blockers and antimuscarinic drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of combining tamsulosin and solifenacin therapy compared to tamsulosin and solifenacin monotherapy for treating stent-related symptoms. Randomized controlled trials assessing tamsulosin, solifenacin, or their combination for stent-related symptoms treatment were identified through a comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) from January 2018 to December 2023. Ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ), international prostate symptom score (IPSS), visual analog scale (VAS), and quality of life (QoL) were pooled for meta-analysis. Eleven studies with a total of 1,627 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Solifenacin significantly improved urinary symptoms (MD: 15.31; 95%CI: 0.36-30.26; <i>p</i>=0.040) and reduced the IPSS (MD: -2.52; 95%CI: -3.68--1.36; <i>p</i><0.00001) compared to the control group. Tamsulosin reduced urinary symptoms on the USSQ (MD: 14.27; 95%CI: 8.68-19.86; <i>p</i><0.00001), general health problems (MD: 4.53; 95%CI: 2.13-6.94; <i>p</i>=0.0002), and IPSS (MD: -0.95; 95%CI:-1.86--0.03; <i>p</i><0.00001) compared to the control group. Solifenacin demonstrated a more significant reduction in the overall IPSS compared to tamsulosin (MD: -1.57; 95%CI: -2.85--0.29; <i>p</i>=0.020). The combination of solifenacin and tamsulosin resulted in a significantly superior reduction in IPSS compared to solifenacin monotherapies (MD: - 2.30; 95%CI: -3.23--1.37; <i>p</i><0.00001) and tamsulosin monotherapy (MD: -3.17; 95%CI: -5.07--1.27; <i>p</i>=0.00001). No significant differences were found between tamsulosin and solifenacin in terms of QoL (MD: 0.12; 95%CI: -0.01-0.26; <i>p</i>=0.070) and VAS (MD: 0.25; 95%CI: -0.95-1.44; <i>p</i>=0.690). In conclusion, solifenacin was more effective than tamsulosin in reducing stent-related symptoms, and the combination of tamsulosin and solifenacin was superior to either monotherapy in alleviating stent-related symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":517416,"journal":{"name":"Narra J","volume":"5 2","pages":"e1683"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12425523/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative efficacy of solifenacin and tamsulosin in alleviating stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Dianita H Harahap, Kharisma P Adhyatma, Elbert Elbert, Felix Khosasi, Muhammad H Warli\",\"doi\":\"10.52225/narra.v5i2.1683\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Ureteral stents, commonly used in urology, can cause side effects affecting patient quality of life. However, studies on managing lower urinary tract symptoms showed inconsistencies due to the use of various alpha-blockers and antimuscarinic drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of combining tamsulosin and solifenacin therapy compared to tamsulosin and solifenacin monotherapy for treating stent-related symptoms. Randomized controlled trials assessing tamsulosin, solifenacin, or their combination for stent-related symptoms treatment were identified through a comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) from January 2018 to December 2023. Ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ), international prostate symptom score (IPSS), visual analog scale (VAS), and quality of life (QoL) were pooled for meta-analysis. Eleven studies with a total of 1,627 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Solifenacin significantly improved urinary symptoms (MD: 15.31; 95%CI: 0.36-30.26; <i>p</i>=0.040) and reduced the IPSS (MD: -2.52; 95%CI: -3.68--1.36; <i>p</i><0.00001) compared to the control group. Tamsulosin reduced urinary symptoms on the USSQ (MD: 14.27; 95%CI: 8.68-19.86; <i>p</i><0.00001), general health problems (MD: 4.53; 95%CI: 2.13-6.94; <i>p</i>=0.0002), and IPSS (MD: -0.95; 95%CI:-1.86--0.03; <i>p</i><0.00001) compared to the control group. Solifenacin demonstrated a more significant reduction in the overall IPSS compared to tamsulosin (MD: -1.57; 95%CI: -2.85--0.29; <i>p</i>=0.020). The combination of solifenacin and tamsulosin resulted in a significantly superior reduction in IPSS compared to solifenacin monotherapies (MD: - 2.30; 95%CI: -3.23--1.37; <i>p</i><0.00001) and tamsulosin monotherapy (MD: -3.17; 95%CI: -5.07--1.27; <i>p</i>=0.00001). No significant differences were found between tamsulosin and solifenacin in terms of QoL (MD: 0.12; 95%CI: -0.01-0.26; <i>p</i>=0.070) and VAS (MD: 0.25; 95%CI: -0.95-1.44; <i>p</i>=0.690). In conclusion, solifenacin was more effective than tamsulosin in reducing stent-related symptoms, and the combination of tamsulosin and solifenacin was superior to either monotherapy in alleviating stent-related symptoms.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":517416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Narra J\",\"volume\":\"5 2\",\"pages\":\"e1683\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12425523/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Narra J\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v5i2.1683\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Narra J","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v5i2.1683","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

输尿管支架常用于泌尿外科,可引起影响患者生活质量的副作用。然而,由于使用各种α -受体阻滞剂和抗毒蕈碱药物,下尿路症状的治疗研究显示不一致。本研究的目的是评价坦索罗新和索非那新联合治疗与坦索罗新和索非那新单药治疗支架相关症状的有效性。2018年1月至2023年12月,通过对四个数据库(PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane)的综合检索,确定了评估坦索罗新、索非那新或其联合治疗支架相关症状的随机对照试验。输尿管支架症状问卷(USSQ)、国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)和生活质量(QoL)进行meta分析。11项研究共1627例患者被纳入定量分析。索利那新显著改善泌尿系统症状(MD: 15.31; 95%CI: 0.36-30.26; p=0.040),降低IPSS (MD: -2.52; 95%CI: -3.68- 1.36; ppp=0.0002)和IPSS (MD: -0.95; 95%CI:-1.86- 0.03; pp=0.020)。与索非那新单药治疗相比,索非那新联合坦索罗新可显著降低IPSS (MD: - 2.30; 95%CI: -3.23—1.37;pp=0.00001)。坦索罗辛与索利那新在生活质量(MD: 0.12; 95%CI: -0.01 ~ 0.26; p=0.070)和VAS (MD: 0.25; 95%CI: -0.95 ~ 1.44; p=0.690)方面无显著差异。综上所述,索非那新在减轻支架相关症状方面比坦索罗新更有效,并且在减轻支架相关症状方面,坦索罗新和索非那新联合治疗优于单药治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative efficacy of solifenacin and tamsulosin in alleviating stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative efficacy of solifenacin and tamsulosin in alleviating stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative efficacy of solifenacin and tamsulosin in alleviating stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Comparative efficacy of solifenacin and tamsulosin in alleviating stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ureteral stents, commonly used in urology, can cause side effects affecting patient quality of life. However, studies on managing lower urinary tract symptoms showed inconsistencies due to the use of various alpha-blockers and antimuscarinic drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of combining tamsulosin and solifenacin therapy compared to tamsulosin and solifenacin monotherapy for treating stent-related symptoms. Randomized controlled trials assessing tamsulosin, solifenacin, or their combination for stent-related symptoms treatment were identified through a comprehensive search of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) from January 2018 to December 2023. Ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ), international prostate symptom score (IPSS), visual analog scale (VAS), and quality of life (QoL) were pooled for meta-analysis. Eleven studies with a total of 1,627 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Solifenacin significantly improved urinary symptoms (MD: 15.31; 95%CI: 0.36-30.26; p=0.040) and reduced the IPSS (MD: -2.52; 95%CI: -3.68--1.36; p<0.00001) compared to the control group. Tamsulosin reduced urinary symptoms on the USSQ (MD: 14.27; 95%CI: 8.68-19.86; p<0.00001), general health problems (MD: 4.53; 95%CI: 2.13-6.94; p=0.0002), and IPSS (MD: -0.95; 95%CI:-1.86--0.03; p<0.00001) compared to the control group. Solifenacin demonstrated a more significant reduction in the overall IPSS compared to tamsulosin (MD: -1.57; 95%CI: -2.85--0.29; p=0.020). The combination of solifenacin and tamsulosin resulted in a significantly superior reduction in IPSS compared to solifenacin monotherapies (MD: - 2.30; 95%CI: -3.23--1.37; p<0.00001) and tamsulosin monotherapy (MD: -3.17; 95%CI: -5.07--1.27; p=0.00001). No significant differences were found between tamsulosin and solifenacin in terms of QoL (MD: 0.12; 95%CI: -0.01-0.26; p=0.070) and VAS (MD: 0.25; 95%CI: -0.95-1.44; p=0.690). In conclusion, solifenacin was more effective than tamsulosin in reducing stent-related symptoms, and the combination of tamsulosin and solifenacin was superior to either monotherapy in alleviating stent-related symptoms.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信