Article

Nifedipine versus tamsulosin for the management of lower ureteral stones.

Division of Urology, Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Turin, San Luigi Hospital, Orbassano, Italy.
The Journal of Urology (Impact Factor: 3.75). 09/2004; 172(2):568-71. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000132390.61756.ff
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We evaluate and compare the effectiveness of 2 different medical therapies during watchful waiting in patients with lower ureteral stones.
A total of 86 patients with stones less than 1 cm located in the lower ureter (juxtavesical or intramural tract) were enrolled in the study and were randomly divided into 3 groups. Group 1 (30) and 2 (28) patients received daily oral treatment of 30 mg deflazacort, (maximum 10 days). In addition group 1 patients received 30 mg nifedipine slow-release (maximum 28 days) and group 2 received 1 daily oral therapy of 0.4 mg tamsulosin (maximum 28 days), Group 3 patients (28) were used as controls. Statistical analyses were performed using Student's test, ANOVA test, chi-square test and Fisher's exact test.
The average stone size for groups 1 to 3 was 4.7, 5.42 and 5.35 mm, respectively, which was not statistically significant. Expulsion was observed in 24 of 30 patients in group 1 (80%), 24 of 28 in group 2 (85%) and 12 of 28 in group 3 (43%). The difference in groups 1 and 2 with respect to group 3 was significant. Average expulsion time for groups 1 to 3 was 9.3, 7.7 and 12 days, respectively. A statistically significant difference was noted between groups 2 and 3. Mean sodium diclofenac dosage per patient in groups 1 to 3 was 19.5, 26, and 105 mg, respectively. A statistical significant difference was observed between groups 1 and 2 with respect to group 3.
Medical treatments with nifedipine and tamsulosin proved to be safe and effective as demonstrated by the increased stone expulsion rate and reduced need for analgesic therapy. Moreover medical therapy, particularly in regard to tamsulosin, reduced expulsion time.

1 Bookmark
 · 
277 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the potential role of tamsulosin in the medical treatment of distal ureteral stones. Ninety patients with symptomatic distal ureteral calculi were enrolled. They were randomly divided into two groups: Group A (n=45) received diclofenac 100 mg on demand for 4 weeks plus levofloxacin 250 mg daily for the first week and were well hydrated; and Group B (n=45) received the same therapy plus tamsulosin 0.4 mg/daily for 4 weeks. Abdominal ultrasound scans and KUB X-rays were performed weekly. Stone expulsion rates, time to expulsion, pain episodes and analgesic usage were determined. Intervention by means of shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL) or ureteroscopy was evaluated. The stone expulsion rate was 51.1% for Group A, compared to 88.9% for Group B (p=0.001). The average time to expulsion was 12.53+/-2.12 days for Group A and 7.32+/-0.78 days for Group B (p=0.04). The number of pain episodes was significantly lower in Group B and mean use of analgesics was lower for Group B (0.14+/-0.5 vials) than Group A (2.78+/-2.7 vials). Twenty-two patients in Group A failed to pass their stones after 4 weeks but only five in Group B. Of the patients who were not stone-free, 19 were treated with SWL and eight underwent ureteroscopy. Our study reveals the efficacy of tamsulosin for the treatment of distal ureteral stones. Tamsulosin should be added to the standard medical approach for treating these stones.
    Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology 02/2008; 42(1):59-62. · 1.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To compare the efficacy of tamsulosin versus tamsulosin plus tadalafil as medical expulsive therapy for lower ureteric stones.Methods Between January 2013 and December 2013, 244 patients presenting with distal ureteric stones (size 5–10 mm) were randomized equally to tamsulosin (group A) or tamsulosin plus tadalafil (group B). Therapy was given for a maximum of 4 weeks. Stone expulsion rate, time to stone expulsion, analgesic use, number of hospital visits for pain, follow up, endoscopic treatment and adverse effects of drugs were recorded. Statistical analyses were carried out using Student's t-test and the χ2-test.ResultsThere was a statistically significant higher expulsion rate in group B compared with group A (83.6% vs 65.5%; P-value = 0.031) and a shorter time to expulsion (14.9 ± 4.4 days vs 16.7 ± 4.8 days; P-value = 0.003). Statistically significant differences were noted in terms of the number of hospital visits and analgesic requirement in favor of group B. There was no serious adverse event. An improvement in erectile function was noted in patients of group B compared with those of group A.Conclusions Medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones using tamsulosin plus tadalafil is safe, effective and well tolerated. Furthermore, tadalafil provides the additional advantage of improving erectile dysfunction when this condition coexists with a lower ureteric stone.
    International Journal of Urology 07/2014; · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We investigate the predictability of medical expulsive therapy (MET) success with alpha blockers based on Hounsfield unit (HU) values and Hounsfield density (HD) values measured by computed tomography (CT) for distal ureteral stones. Between July 2011 and May 2012, 44 patients (19 female and 25 male) with 5- to 10-mm stones in the distal ureters were included in this randomized prospective study. Non-contrast CT examinations were performed in these patients. HU and HD values of stones were calculated. Doxazosine, 4 mg/day orally, was administered as a single dose to all patients for MET. Patients were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included 18 patients (43.9%) with dropped stones with MET. Group 2 included 23 patients (56.1%) with no stone passage with MET. In Group 1, the mean stone size was 7.7 mm, the mean HU was 507, and the HD was 53.04/mm. In Group 2, the mean stone size was 8.25 mm, the mean HU was 625, and the mean HD was 61.54/mm. The HU and HD values in Group 2 were higher than in Group 1. However, there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.85 and 0.93 for HU and HD, respectively). We found that HU and HD values cannot be used to predict the chances of success for MET. Although the sample size is appropriate for the study, further comparative studies involving more patients are warranted.
    Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada 01/2013; 7(11-12):E677-E680. · 1.66 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
125 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014