Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25875226›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Long-term prescription of α-blockers decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention-a nationwide population-based study.

Chia-Chu Liu, Hui-Min Hsieh, Chia-Fang Wu, Tusty-Jiuan Hsieh, Shu-Pin Huang, Yii-Her Chou, Chun-Nung Huang, Wen-Jeng Wu, Ming-Tsang Wu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Efficacy and Safety of Alpha-Blockers for Kidney Stones in Adults.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chia-Chu LiuDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Urology, Pingtung Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Executive Yuan, Pingtung, Taiwan.
Hui-Min HsiehDepartment of Public Health, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Chia-Fang WuDepartment of Public Health, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Tusty-Jiuan HsiehDepartment of Medical Genetics, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Shu-Pin HuangDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Yii-Her ChouDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Chun-Nung HuangDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Wen-Jeng WuDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Ming-Tsang WuDepartment of Public Health, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Department of Family Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; Center of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, Kaohsiung Municipal Hsiao-Kang Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
Kaohsiung Medical University · TWKaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeα1 receptors and subtypes have been confirmed to distribute in human pelvis and calyces recently. As used in ureteral stones, α-blocker treatment may facilitate kidney stone passage and long-term prescription of α-blocker may decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis. The aim of this study is to determine if use of α-blockers 180 days or more can decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention. MATERIALS AND

methodsA representative database of 1,000,000 patients from Taiwan's National Health Insurance was analyzed. Eligible patients were those who had received the first-time procedure for upper urinary stone removal, including extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy, ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy, or both, between 2000 and 2010. After completing a 180-day treatment for first event, patients were prospectively followed-up until a second set of stone procedures was performed (proxy of stone recurrence), loss to follow-up, or end of study. The effect of percentage of total number of days of α-blocker use on need for second set of stone procedures within a post treatment 180-day follow-up period was analyzed by quartile. A nested case-control study was also performed.

results1,259 patients were eligible for final analyses. During 3,980 person-years follow-up, 167 patients had recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention. From first to fourth quartile of drug exposure, recurrence rates were 45.64, 47.19, 43.11, and 18.52 per 1,000 person-years. The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.46 (95% CI = 0.24 to 0.89) for the fourth quartile (vs. quartile 1). In the nested case-control study, adjusted ORs was 0.23 (95% CI = 0.10 to 0.53) in the fourth quartile (vs. quartile 1). The results remained similar even in patients categorized by cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD) quartiles and average cDDD per day quartiles.

conclusionUse of α-blockers for 180 days or more decrease the risk of recurrent urolithiasis needed for surgical intervention. In patients at higher risk of recurrent urolithiasis, long term prescription of α-blockers might help them prevent further surgical intervention.

Indexed as

Adrenergic alpha-AntagonistsAdultAgedCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansKidney CalculiLithotripsyMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceTaiwanUrolithiasisAdrenergic alpha-Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID25875226
PMCPMC4395263
OpenAlexW1909841641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.