SynthesisIrish journal of medical science2015
Α₁-blockers in the management of acute urinary retention secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Irish journal of medical science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Isosorbide dinitrate as an effective adjunct therapy for acute urinary retention: A randomized controlled trial.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Drug- and patient-specific neurological risk profiles of α1-adrenergic blockers: evidence from FAERS and external validation in JADER.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2026Article
- Additive Value of Pyridostigmine to Silodosin in the Management of Acute Urinary Retention Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparing effects of alpha-blocker management on acute urinary retention secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Prostate international · 2023Article
- Article
- Extraurethral Foley catheter length: A surrogate marker for size of prostatic adenoma and a clinical predictor of trial without catheter success.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundα1-Blockers have been widely used in the conservative management of acute urinary retention (AUR).
aimsTo compare the efficacy and safety of α1-blockers in male patients with AUR secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
methodsElectronic searches on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were performed to identify all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of α1-blockers for the treatment of AUR. Relevant reviews and reference lists of included studies were explored.
resultsNine studies involving a total of 1051 men were enrolled in this review. Compared to 38.9 % (161/414) in control groups, 56.8 % (362/637) of patients receiving α1-blockers had a successful trial without catheter (TWOC). Meta-analysis demonstrated that α1-blockers have a substantial effect on the successful resumption of micturition after TWOC (RR = 1.45, 95 % CI 1.20-1.75, P = 0.0001). In the subsequent phase, the outcomes across studies indicated that α1-blockers may provide little benefit to maintain the satisfactory voiding without AUR recurrence or BPH surgery in a long-term follow-up. α1-Blockers were generally low and well tolerated in both phases.
conclusionsIn conclusion, α1-blockers provide substantial benefit in increasing a satisfactory micturition within 24 h after TWOC for men with AUR due to BPH, even though the long-term effectiveness remains uncertain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.