Combination of solifenacin and tamsulosin may provide additional beneficial effects for ureteral stent-related symptoms-outcomes from a network meta-analysis.
Drug Therapy, Combination
Humans
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
/ drug therapy
Network Meta-Analysis
Pain
/ drug therapy
Quinazolines
/ therapeutic use
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Solifenacin Succinate
/ therapeutic use
Stents
/ adverse effects
Tamsulosin
/ therapeutic use
Treatment Outcome
Urinary Catheterization
/ adverse effects
Urological Agents
/ therapeutic use
Drug therapies
Network meta-analysis
Ureteral stent-related symptoms
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
11
04
2018
accepted:
07
07
2018
pubmed:
22
7
2018
medline:
29
5
2019
entrez:
22
7
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To systematically evaluate the different efficacy among generally used drugs for stent-related symptoms (SRS) with the method of network meta-analysis. A systematic search was performed in the US National Library of Medicine's life science database (Medline), Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews before December 2017. Analysis was performed under multivariate random-effects network model and effects of drugs were ranked with surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. 19 trials with 2036 patients investigating 4 different intervention including tamsulosin (Tam), alfuzosin (Alfu), solifenacin (Soli) and combination of Tam and Solif were finally included in our analysis. Tam plus Soli had the highest SUCRA on all aspects of ureteral stent symptom questionnaire: urinary symptoms (86.2%), body pain (85.0%), general health (80.5%), work performance (72.0%) and sexual performance (84.4%). Except for pain relief, Soli showed higher SUCRA than Tam or Alfu in rest respects. Tam and Alfu showed similar SUCRA on urinary symptoms (53.0 vs 48.7%) and body pain relief (61.9 vs 62.9%). Tam plus Soli might be the most effective intervention for SRSs. As for monotherapy, Soli showed advantages in most respects except for pain relief compared to Tam or Alfu. Tam and Alfu showed similar efficacy on urinary symptoms and body pain relief.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30030658
doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2404-6
pii: 10.1007/s00345-018-2404-6
doi:
Substances chimiques
Quinazolines
0
Urological Agents
0
alfuzosin
90347YTW5F
Tamsulosin
G3P28OML5I
Solifenacin Succinate
KKA5DLD701
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
289-297Subventions
Organisme : 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospotal, Sichuan University
ID : 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence
Organisme : 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospotal, Sichuan University
ID : West China Hospotal
Organisme : 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospotal, Sichuan University
ID : Sichuan University
Organisme : Project of the Health and Family Planning Committee of SichuanProvince, The popularization and promotion of ureteroscopic technique in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones in primary hospitals
ID : 16PI294
Organisme : Project of Science and Technology Department of Chengdu, Research and application ofurogenital suspension mesh
ID : 2016-HM02-00020-SF
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
J Endourol. 2001 Mar;15(2):151-4
pubmed: 11325084
Urology. 2002 Apr;59(4):511-6
pubmed: 11927301
Urology. 2006 Jan;67(1):35-9
pubmed: 16413328
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Apr;59(4):342-53
pubmed: 16549255
J Endourol. 2008 Apr;22(4):651-6
pubmed: 18338955
J Urol. 2009 Jan;181(1):170-6
pubmed: 19013590
Urol Res. 2009 Jun;37(3):147-52
pubmed: 19277623
BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2700
pubmed: 19622552
J Endourol. 2009 Nov;23(11):1913-7
pubmed: 19814699
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;64(2):163-71
pubmed: 20688472
Urol Int. 2011;87(1):19-22
pubmed: 21597261
Can Urol Assoc J. 2012 Dec;6(6):E234-7
pubmed: 21914427
J Endourol. 2012 Sep;26(9):1237-41
pubmed: 22563773
Int J Urol. 2013 Jan;20(1):28-39
pubmed: 23190275
Urolithiasis. 2013 Jun;41(3):247-52
pubmed: 23515684
BMJ. 2013 May 14;346:f2914
pubmed: 23674332
Urology. 2014 Jan;83(1):56-61
pubmed: 24210570
Int Braz J Urol. 2013 Nov-Dec;39(6):832-40
pubmed: 24456787
Int Urol Nephrol. 2014 Dec;46(12):2279-83
pubmed: 25201459
Nat Rev Urol. 2015 Jan;12(1):17-25
pubmed: 25534997
World J Urol. 2015 Nov;33(11):1833-40
pubmed: 25809877
World J Urol. 2016 Jul;34(7):963-8
pubmed: 26453222
Int Braz J Urol. 2016 May-Jun;42(3):487-93
pubmed: 27286111
Arab J Urol. 2016 Feb 22;14(2):115-22
pubmed: 27489738
Int Braz J Urol. 2016 Jul-Aug;42(4):727-33
pubmed: 27564283
World J Urol. 2017 Jul;35(7):1149-1154
pubmed: 27766388
J Endourol. 2017 Jan;31(1):100-109
pubmed: 27809592
BMC Urol. 2016 Nov 15;16(1):66
pubmed: 27846839
Arab J Urol. 2016 Sep 28;14(4):262-268
pubmed: 27900215
World J Urol. 2017 Aug;35(8):1261-1268
pubmed: 28050642
Int J Urol. 2017 Apr;24(4):250-259
pubmed: 28236323
Int Urol Nephrol. 2017 Jun;49(6):961-966
pubmed: 28260223
World J Urol. 2017 Nov;35(11):1669-1680
pubmed: 28550362
J Urol. 1967 May;97(5):840-4
pubmed: 6025928