Advertisement

Silodosin versus Tamsulosin as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones: a prospective randomized study

Silodosin versus Tamsulosin as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones: a prospective randomized study

Urologia 2015; 82(1): 54 - 57

Article Type: ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

Article Subject: BASIC RESEARCH/ricerca di base

DOI:10.5301/uro.5000083

Authors

Lucio Dell’Atti

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of silodosin (8 mg) versus tamsulosin (0.4 mg) as a medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral stones.

Methods

136 patients (aged 18 years or older) had presented with renal colic, were diagnosed to have a single, unilateral, radiopaque, proximal ureteral stone (range 4-10 mm in size), and agreed to undergo conservative management.

For a 3-week period, 68 patients per group were assigned to the following treatments: Group A (gA) received tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily, and Group B (gB) received silodosin 8 mg once daily. The time to expulsion, analgesic use, follow-up, endoscopic treatment and adverse effects of drugs were noted.

Results

Considering all the patients enrolled (136), one patient in gA and two patients in gB were unable to continue the study because of orthostatic hypotension within a week from commencing the treatment. A total of 133 patients (gA: 67; gB: 66) were included in this study. A stone expulsion rate of 61.2% (41 out of 67 patients) was observed in gA, and 80.3% (53 out of 66) was observed in gB. gB showed a statistically relevant advantage in terms of stone expulsion rate (p: 0.003), as well as in terms of expulsion time (weeks) (p: 0.002). No severe complications were recorded in both groups. Four patients (10.2%; 4/39) in gA and ten patients (22.7%; 10/44) in gB experienced retrograde ejaculation (<0.002).

Conclusion

The patients treated with silodosin showed a significant increase in expulsion rate and a decrease in expulsion time of lower ureteral stones in our study.

Article History

Disclosures

Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained by all participants. The study was in adherence with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Financial support: The study has not been supported by private or public sources, grants or funds.
Conflict of interest: None.

This article is available as full text PDF.

  • If you are a Subscriber, please log in now.

  • Article price: Eur 36,00
  • You will be granted access to the article for 72 hours and you will be able to download any format (PDF or ePUB). The article will be available in your login area under "My PayPerView". You will need to register a new account (unless you already own an account with this journal), and you will be guided through our online shop. Online purchases are paid by Credit Card through PayPal.
  • If you are not a Subscriber you may:
  • Subscribe to this journal
  • Unlimited access to all our archives, 24 hour a day, every day of the week.

Authors

Affiliations

  • Urology Unit, Arcispedale S. Anna, Cona, Ferrara - Italy

Article usage statistics

The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.

No supplementary material is available for this article.