Advertisement

World Journal of Urology

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 289–297 | Cite as

Combination of solifenacin and tamsulosin may provide additional beneficial effects for ureteral stent-related symptoms—outcomes from a network meta-analysis

  • Zhongyu Jian
  • Yuntian Chen
  • Qinyu Liu
  • Banghua Liao
  • Tongxin Yang
  • Hong Li
  • Kunjie WangEmail author
Review

Abstract

Purpose

To systematically evaluate the different efficacy among generally used drugs for stent-related symptoms (SRS) with the method of network meta-analysis.

Methods

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.

Results

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%).

Conclusions

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.

Keywords

Ureteral stent-related symptoms Network meta-analysis Drug therapies 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This article is supported by grants from 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University (ZY2016104), 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 (16PI294) and Project of Science and Technology Department of Chengdu, Research and application of urogenital suspension mesh (2016-HM02-00020-SF).

Author’s contribution

JZ and CY: project development, data collection and management, manuscript writing and revising; LQ: data collection, data analysis; LB and YT: data collection, data analysis; LH: data collection, data analysis; WK: project design and development, data interpretation, manuscript editing and revising. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This article is supported by grants from 1.3.5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University (ZY2016104), 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 (16PI294) and Project of Science and Technology Department of Chengdu, Research and application of urogenital suspension mesh (2016-HM02-00020-SF).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors of this article as well as all the included studies declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

The study protocol is compliant with ethical standards.

Supplementary material

345_2018_2404_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)
345_2018_2404_MOESM2_ESM.tif (204 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (TIFF 204 kb)
345_2018_2404_MOESM3_ESM.tif (959 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (TIFF 959 kb)
345_2018_2404_MOESM4_ESM.tif (939 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (TIFF 939 kb)
345_2018_2404_MOESM5_ESM.tif (866 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (TIFF 865 kb)
345_2018_2404_MOESM6_ESM.tif (7.5 mb)
Supplementary material 6 (TIFF 7631 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Zimskind PD, Fetter TR, Wilkerson JL (1967) Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically. J Urol 97:840–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Joshi HB, Okeke A, Newns N, Keeley FX Jr, Timoney AG (2002) Characterization of urinary symptoms in patients with ureteral stents. Urology 59:511–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Joshi HB, Stainthorpe A, Keeley FX Jr, MacDonagh R, Timoney AG (2001) Indwelling ureteral stents: evaluation of quality of life to aid outcome analysis. J Endourol 15:151–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Betschart P, Zumstein V, Piller A, Schmid HP, Abt D (2017) Prevention and treatment of symptoms associated with indwelling ureteral stents: a systematic review. Int J Urol 24:250–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang J, Zhang X, Zhang T, Mu J, Bai B, Lei Y (2017) The role of solifenacin, as monotherapy or combination with tamsulosin in ureteral stent-related symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol 35:1669–1680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mills EJTK, Ioannidis JP (2013) Demystifying trial networks and network meta-analysis. BMJ 346:f2914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 339:b2700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wiebe N, Vandermeer B, Platt RW, Klassen TP, Moher D, Barrowman NJ (2006) A systematic review identifies a lack of standardization in methods for handling missing variance data. J Clin Epidemiol 59:342–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP (2011) Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol 64:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deliveliotis C, Chrisofos M, Gougousis E, Papatsoris A, Dellis A, Varkarakis IM (2006) Is there a role for alpha 1-blockers in treating double-J stent-related symptoms? Urology 67:35–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damiano R, Autorino R, De Sio M, Giacobbe A, Palumbo IM, D’Armiento M (2008) Effect of tamsulosin in preventing ureteral stent-related morbidity: a prospective study. J Endourol 22:651–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beddingfield R, Pedro RN, Hinck B, Kreidberg C, Feia K, Monga M (2009) Alfuzosin to relieve ureteral stent discomfort: a prospective, randomized, placebo controlled study. J Urol 181:170–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Park SC, Jung SW, Lee JW, Rim JS (2009) The effects of tolterodine extended release and alfuzosin for the treatment of double-J stent-related symptoms. J Endourol 23:1913–1917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang CJ, Huang SW, Chang CH (2009) Effects of specific α-1A/1D blocker on lower urinary tract symptoms due to double-J stent: a prospectively randomized study. Urol Res 37:147–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nazim SM, Ather MH (2012) Alpha-blockers impact stent-related symptoms: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Endourol 26:1237–1241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee YJ, Huang KH, Yang HJ, Chang HC, Chen J, Yang TK (2013) Solifenacin improves double-J stent-related symptoms in both genders following uncomplicated ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Urolithiasis 41:247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dellis AE, Keeley FX, Manolas V, Skolarikos AA (2014) Role of α-blockers in the treatment of stent-related symptoms: a prospective randomized control study. Urology 83:56–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Singh I, Tripathy S, Agrawal V (2014) Efficacy of tamsulosin hydrochloride in relieving “double-J ureteral stent-related morbidity”: a randomized placebo controlled clinical study. Int Urol Nephrol 46:2279–2283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Park J, Yoo C, Han DH, Shin DW (2015) A critical assessment of the effects of tamsulosin and solifenacin as monotherapies and as a combination therapy for the treatment of ureteral stent-related symptoms: a 2 × 2 factorial randomized trial. World J Urol 33:1833–1840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abdelaal AM, Al-Adl AM, Abdelbaki SA, Al Azab MM, Al Gamal KA (2016) Efficacy and safety of tamsulosin oral-controlled absorption system, solifenacin, and combined therapy for the management of ureteric stent-related symptoms. Arab J Urol 14:115–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    EL-Nahas AR, Tharwat M, Elsaadany M, Mosbah A, Gaballah MA (2016) A randomized controlled trial comparing alpha blocker (tamsulosin) and anticholinergic (solifenacin) in treatment of ureteral stent-related symptoms. World J Urol 34:963–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hekal IA (2016) Drug treatment of bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms after ureteric JJ-stent insertion: a contemporary, comparative, prospective, randomised placebo-controlled study, single-centre experience. Arab J Urol 14:262–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu Q, Liao B, Zhang R et al (2016) Combination therapy only shows short-term superiority over monotherapy on ureteral stent-related symptoms–outcome from a randomized controlled trial. BMC Urol 16:66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maldonado-Avila M, Garduño-Arteaga L, Jungfermann-Guzman R et al (2016) Efficacy of tamsulosin, oxybutynin, and their combination in the control of double-j stent-related lower urinary tract symptoms. Int Braz J Urol 42:487–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang L, Li J, Pan M, Han W, Liu S, Xiao Y (2016) Doxazosin oral intake therapy to relieve stent-related urinary symptoms and pain: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Int Braz J Urol 42:727–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Abdelhamid MH, Zayed AS, Ghoneima WE et al (2017) Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare solifenacin versus trospium chloride in the relief of double-J stent-related symptoms. World J Urol 35:1261–1268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dellis AE, Papatsoris AG, Keeley FX Jr et al (2017) Tamsulosin, solifenacin, and their combination for the treatment of stent-related symptoms: a randomized controlled study. J Endourol 31:100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ragab M, Soliman MG, Tawfik A et al (2017) The role of pregabalin in relieving ureteral stent-related symptoms: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int Urol Nephrol 49:961–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tanidir Y, Mangir N, Sahan A, Ulukaya M (2016) Turkish version of the ureteral stent symptoms questionnaire: linguistic and psychometric validation. World J Urol 35:1149–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    White I (2009) Multivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Stata J 9:40–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lange D, Bidnur S, Hoag N, Chew BH (2015) Ureteral stent-associated complications—where we are and where we are going. Nat Rev Urol 12:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yamaguchi O (2013) Latest treatment for lower urinary tract dysfunction: therapeutic agents and mechanism of action. Int J Urol 20:28–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mokhtari G, Shakiba M, Ghodsi S et al (2011) Effect of terazosin on lower urinary tract symptoms and pain due to double-J stent: a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. Urol Int 87:19–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tehranchi A, Rezaei Y, Khalkhali H, Rezaei M (2013) Effects of terazosin and tolterodine on ureteral stent related symptoms: a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. Int Braz J Urol 39:832–840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kuyumcuoglu U, Eryildirim B, Tuncer M, Tarhan F, Ozgül A (2012) Effectiveness of medical treatment in overcoming the ureteral double-J stent related symptoms. Can Urol Assoc J 6:E234–E237CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Urology, Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), West China HospitalSichuan UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations