Is there a role for tamsulosin in shock wave lithotripsy for renal and ureteral calculi?

Departments of Urology and Biostatistics, Christian Medical College, Ida Scudder Road, Vellore, Tamil Nadu 632004, India.
The Journal of Urology (Impact Factor: 3.75). 07/2007; 177(6):2185-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.160
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We evaluated the effect of the alpha-blocker tamsulosin on stone clearance, analgesic requirements and steinstrasse in shock wave lithotripsy for solitary renal and ureteral calculus.
A prospective, double-blind, randomized placebo controlled study was performed during 1 year involving 60 patients with a solitary renal or ureteral calculus undergoing shock wave lithotripsy. The control group (30) received 0.4 mg tamsulosin and the study group (30) received placebo daily until stone clearance or for a maximum of 30 days. An oral preparation of dextropropoxyphene hydrochloride and acetaminophen was the analgesic used on an on-demand basis. The parameters assessed were stone size, position, clearance time, effect on steinstrasse and analgesic requirement.
The overall clearance rate was 96.6% (28 of 29) in the study group and 79.3% (23 of 29) in the control group (p = 0.04). With larger stones 11 to 24 mm the difference in the clearance rate was significant (p = 0.03) but not so with the smaller stones 6 to 10 mm (p = 0.35). The average dose of analgesic used was lower with tamsulosin than with controls, without statistical significance. Steinstrasse resolved spontaneously in the tamsulosin group whereas 25% (2 of 8) required intervention in the placebo group. There was no difference between the 2 groups with regard to age, stone size or location.
The alpha-blocker tamsulosin seemed to facilitate stone clearance, particularly with larger stones during shock wave lithotripsy for renal and ureteral calculus. It also appeared to improve the outcome of steinstrasse. Tamsulosin may have a potential role in routine shock wave lithotripsy.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To review the evidence for the use of alpha-blockers after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in enhancing the effectiveness of renal and ureteric stone clearance. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library up to January 2009. All randomized controlled trials in which alpha-blockers were evaluated after ESWL were eligible for the analysis. Outcome measures assessed were clearance rate (primary) and expulsion time (secondary). Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. All data were analysed using RevMan 5. Of the 29 identified papers, seven trials with a total of 484 patients met the predefined criteria. These studies evaluated the effectiveness of the alpha-blocker tamsulosin, and studied clearance rate as the primary outcome. There was large heterogeneity between trials, but their methodological quality was adequate. The pooled absolute risk difference of clearance rate was 16% (95% confidence interval 5-27%) in favour of the tamsulosin group, i.e. an average of six patients have to be treated with tamsulosin after ESWL to achieve clearance in one. Subgroup analysis for the six studies that used a dose of 0.4 mg tamsulosin showed a pooled risk difference of 19 (10-29)%. The expulsion time was analysed in three studies and the pooled mean difference was 8 (-3-20) days in favour of the tamsulosin group. Pain and analgesic usage was reported to be lower with tamsulosin. Adverse effects of tamsulosin, mainly dizziness, were reported in eight patients (3%). Treatment with tamsulosin after ESWL appears to be effective in assisting stone clearance in patients with renal and ureteric calculi. To make a definite clinical recommendation to use tamsulosin after ESWL for renal and ureteric calculi, a high quality confirmatory trial is warranted.
    BJU International 11/2009; 106(2):256-61. · 3.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To evaluate the effects of tamsulosin on stone clearance and analgesic requirements after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for solitary renal and upper ureteral calculi.Patients and methodsA prospective randomized placebo controlled study was carried out on 126 patients who underwent SWL for solitary radio-opaque renal or upper ureteral calculi ≤20 mm. Patients were randomized into two groups receiving either 0.4 mg of tamsulosin (GT) or placebo (GP). SWL was performed 3-weekly until patients became stone-free or for a maximum of 3 months. Analgesics were used on demand and pain was evaluated by a visual pain scale.ResultsRenal stones represented 55.6% and 66.7% for GT and GP, respectively (p = 0.27). Mean renal and ureteral stone size were (12.3 ± 1.8 mm vs. 11.5 ± 2.3 mm, p = 0.14) and (9.7 ± 2.6 mm vs. 8.6 ± 1.7 mm, p = 0.1) for the GT and GP, respectively. GT required fewer SWL sessions for ureteral (1.2 vs. 1.6, p = 0.02) and renal stones (1.8 vs. 2.3, p = 0.08). Stone-free rate (SFR) was higher in GT for upper ureteral stones (96.4% vs. 66.7%, p = 0.01) and renal pelvis stones at a cutoff size >10 mm (p = 0.01). The mean time of stone clearance was significantly lower in GT (4.2 ± 1.9 weeks vs. 7.5 ± 2.3 weeks, p = 0.001) for ureteral stones. Attacks of renal colic were more frequent in GP (82.5% vs. 44.4%, p = 0.04) with increased demand for analgesia (p = 0.04). Steinstrasse was recorded in 3 and 7 patients of the GT and GP, respectively (p = 0.32).Conclusion Tamsulosin facilitates clearance of upper ureteral stone fragments after SWL and decreases the analgesic requirements. These effects were not similarly evident for renal stones.
    African Journal of Urology 03/2012; 18(1):24–28.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Shock wave lithotripsy is a commonly used procedure for eradicating upper urinary tract stones in patients who require treatment. A number of methods have been proposed to improve the results of this procedure, including proper patient selection, modifications in technique, adjunctive therapy to facilitate elimination of fragments, and changes in lithotripter design. This article assesses the utility of these measures through an analysis of contemporary literature.
    Reviews in urology 01/2013; 15(2):49-60.