Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Silodosin, a recently introduced selective α-blocker, has a much higher selectivity for the α-1A receptor. The efficacy and safety of silodosin compared to tamsulosin in medical expulsive therapy (MET) are controversial. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of silodosin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yuan-Pin Hsu, Chin-Wang Hsu, Chyi-Huey Bai, Sheng-Wei Cheng, Kuan-Chou Chen, Chiehfeng Chen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6112672?pdf=render
id doaj-ff510c01caa544769d1530293f58b900
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ff510c01caa544769d1530293f58b9002020-11-25T02:13:29ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01138e020303510.1371/journal.pone.0203035Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Yuan-Pin HsuChin-Wang HsuChyi-Huey BaiSheng-Wei ChengKuan-Chou ChenChiehfeng ChenSilodosin, a recently introduced selective α-blocker, has a much higher selectivity for the α-1A receptor. The efficacy and safety of silodosin compared to tamsulosin in medical expulsive therapy (MET) are controversial. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of silodosin compared to tamsulosin for treating ureteral stones <10 mm in diameter. We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases from their inception to May 2018. We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational studies, which investigated stone expulsion rates using silodosin compared to tamsulosin. Data were synthesized using a random-effects model. Sixteen studies with 1824 patients were eligible for inclusion. Silodosin achieved significantly higher expulsion rates than tamsulosin (pooled risk difference (RD): 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.09 to 0.18, GRADE: high). A subgroup analyses showed that silodosin has a significantly higher expulsion rate on stone sizes of 5-10 mm than tamsulosin (pooled RD: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.22, I2 = 0%). The superior effect was not observed on stone sizes <5 mm. A multivariate regression showed that the RD was negatively associated with the control expulsion rate after adjusting for age and gender (coefficient -0.658, p = 0.01). A sensitivity analysis showed that our findings were robust. Patients receiving silodosin also probably had a significantly shorter expulsion time (pooled mean difference (MD): -2.55 days, 95% CI: -4.06 to -1.04, I2 = 85%, GRADE: moderate) and may have fewer pain episodes (pooled MD: -0.3, 95% CI: -0.51 to -0.09, GRADE: low) but a higher incidence of retrograde ejaculation by 5% compared to those receiving tamsulosin. In conclusion, compared to tamsulosin, silodosin provided significantly better stone passage for patients with ureteral stones (particularly for sizes of 5~10 mm), shorter expulsion times, and fewer pain episodes but caused a higher incidence of retrograde ejaculation.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6112672?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Yuan-Pin Hsu
Chin-Wang Hsu
Chyi-Huey Bai
Sheng-Wei Cheng
Kuan-Chou Chen
Chiehfeng Chen
spellingShingle Yuan-Pin Hsu
Chin-Wang Hsu
Chyi-Huey Bai
Sheng-Wei Cheng
Kuan-Chou Chen
Chiehfeng Chen
Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Yuan-Pin Hsu
Chin-Wang Hsu
Chyi-Huey Bai
Sheng-Wei Cheng
Kuan-Chou Chen
Chiehfeng Chen
author_sort Yuan-Pin Hsu
title Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_short Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_full Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_fullStr Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_sort silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2018-01-01
description Silodosin, a recently introduced selective α-blocker, has a much higher selectivity for the α-1A receptor. The efficacy and safety of silodosin compared to tamsulosin in medical expulsive therapy (MET) are controversial. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of silodosin compared to tamsulosin for treating ureteral stones <10 mm in diameter. We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases from their inception to May 2018. We included randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and observational studies, which investigated stone expulsion rates using silodosin compared to tamsulosin. Data were synthesized using a random-effects model. Sixteen studies with 1824 patients were eligible for inclusion. Silodosin achieved significantly higher expulsion rates than tamsulosin (pooled risk difference (RD): 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.09 to 0.18, GRADE: high). A subgroup analyses showed that silodosin has a significantly higher expulsion rate on stone sizes of 5-10 mm than tamsulosin (pooled RD: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.22, I2 = 0%). The superior effect was not observed on stone sizes <5 mm. A multivariate regression showed that the RD was negatively associated with the control expulsion rate after adjusting for age and gender (coefficient -0.658, p = 0.01). A sensitivity analysis showed that our findings were robust. Patients receiving silodosin also probably had a significantly shorter expulsion time (pooled mean difference (MD): -2.55 days, 95% CI: -4.06 to -1.04, I2 = 85%, GRADE: moderate) and may have fewer pain episodes (pooled MD: -0.3, 95% CI: -0.51 to -0.09, GRADE: low) but a higher incidence of retrograde ejaculation by 5% compared to those receiving tamsulosin. In conclusion, compared to tamsulosin, silodosin provided significantly better stone passage for patients with ureteral stones (particularly for sizes of 5~10 mm), shorter expulsion times, and fewer pain episodes but caused a higher incidence of retrograde ejaculation.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6112672?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT yuanpinhsu silodosinversustamsulosinformedicalexpulsivetreatmentofureteralstonesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chinwanghsu silodosinversustamsulosinformedicalexpulsivetreatmentofureteralstonesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chyihueybai silodosinversustamsulosinformedicalexpulsivetreatmentofureteralstonesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shengweicheng silodosinversustamsulosinformedicalexpulsivetreatmentofureteralstonesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kuanchouchen silodosinversustamsulosinformedicalexpulsivetreatmentofureteralstonesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chiehfengchen silodosinversustamsulosinformedicalexpulsivetreatmentofureteralstonesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1724904956083830784