Nifedipine versus tamsulosin for the management of lower ureteral stones. J Urol

Università degli Studi di Torino, Torino, Piedmont, 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.

Download full-text


Available from: Dario Fontana, Aug 16, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    • ". In medical expulsive treatments in cases of distal ureteral stones with median sizes of 4.7–6.7 mm, 80% passage rate has been reported [7] [8]. Recommended period to wait for stones to pass under observation or medical expulsive treatment is 2 to 6 weeks [9]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Seventy percent of ureteral stones are located at distal ureter. Effective and safe passage of distal ureter stones is mediated by observation or medical expulsive treatment. Most of stones located at distal ureter pass spontaneously under observation; however, some are complicated with urinary tract infection, hydronephrosis, and renal function disturbances. Spontaneous perforation of the upper ureter is a rare condition that poses diagnostic and therapeutic problems. This case is reported, because the patient developed an unexpected spontaneous renal pelvis rupture (SRPR), while she was under observation and expected to pass her right ureteral stone spontaneously through hydration and analgesic treatment.
    10/2013; 2013:932529. DOI:10.1155/2013/932529
  • Source
    • "The patient, the attending urologist, and the investigators were not aware of study arm assignments until the final assessment of outcome. Sample-size calculation was performed based on previous reports of spontaneous stone expulsion and assumed a clinically relevant difference in expulsion rate of 25% [13] [16] [17] [20]. The stone expulsion rate was estimated to be 90% and 65% for patients with and without tamsulosin medication, respectively. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Numerous randomised trials have confirmed the efficacy of medical expulsive therapy with tamsulosin in patients with distal ureteral stones; however, to date, no randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have been performed. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy of medical expulsive therapy with tamsulosin in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled setting. Patients presenting with single distal ureteral stones < or = 7 mm were included in this trial. Patients were randomised in a double-blind fashion to receive either tamsulosin or placebo for 21 d. The medication was discontinued after either stone expulsion or intervention. Abdominal computed tomography was performed to assess the initial and final stone status. MEASUREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS: The primary end point was the stone expulsion rate. Secondary end points were time to stone passage, the amount of analgesic required, the maximum daily pain score, safety of the therapy, and the intervention rate. Ten of 100 randomised patients were excluded from the analysis. No statistically significant differences in patient characteristics and stone size (median: 4.1 mm [tamsulosin arm] vs 3.8 mm [placebo arm], p=0.3) were found between the two treatment arms. The stone expulsion rate was not significantly different between the tamsulosin arm (86.7%) and the placebo arm (88.9%; p=1.0). Median time to stone passage was 7 d in the tamsulosin arm and 10 d in the placebo arm (log-rank test, p=0.36). Patients in the tamsulosin arm required significantly fewer analgesics than patients in the placebo arm (median: 3 vs 7, p=0.011). A caveat is that the exact time of stone passage was missing for 29 patients. Tamsulosin treatment does not improve the stone expulsion rate in patients with distal ureteral stones < or = 7 mm. Nevertheless, patients may benefit from a supportive analgesic effect. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00831701.
    European Urology 04/2009; 56(3):407-12. DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.03.076 · 12.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To update some aspects of the diagnosis and management of urinary lithiasis. A review of the main articles published in PubMed indexed journals was performed. The occurrence of urinary stones is higher among patients with body mass index above 30. Urinary stones are correctly diagnosed by non-contrast CT in 98% of the cases. SWL is the best method for treatment of renal stones smaller than 2 cm with tomographic density under 1000 HU except for stones located at the lower renal pole where the limit is 1 cm. PCNL reaches a stone-free rate between 60% and 100% for renal stones larger than 2 cm. Semirigid ureteroscopy renders patients with distal ureteral stones free in up to 94% of the cases compared to 74% of SWL. Regarding upper ureteral stones, ureteroscopy promotes stone-free rates between 77% and 91%and SWL between 41% and 82%. The link between urinary stones, obesity and diabetes mellitus is well established. Non-contrast CT is the gold standard for diagnosis of urinary stones. SWL is the mainstay in the treatment of renal stones with less than 2 cm and density under 1000 Hounsfield Units, except for lower pole calculi where the limit is 1 cm. PCNL is the preferred method for treatment of renal stones larger than 2 cm. Semirigid ureteroscopy is the method of election for lower ureteral stones; flexible ureteroscopy is reserved for upper ureteral or renal stones with less than 1.5 cm non responsive to SWL or for those patients with contraindications to PCNL.
    Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira 12/2008; 55(6):723-8. · 0.92 Impact Factor
Show more