Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26255996›Full record

SynthesisBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2016

Efficacy and safety of silodosin in the medical expulsion therapy for distal ureteral calculi: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wei Huang, Peng Xue, Huantao Zong, Yong Zhang

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Meta-analysis of the efficacy of sexual intercourse for distal ureteric stones.The Journal of international medical research · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Wei HuangUrology Department, Beijing Tian Tan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Neurourology Research Division, China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Disease, Beijing, China.
Peng XueUrology Department, Beijing Tian Tan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Neurourology Research Division, China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Disease, Beijing, China.
Huantao ZongUrology Department, Beijing Tian Tan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Neurourology Research Division, China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Disease, Beijing, China.
Yong ZhangUrology Department, Beijing Tian Tan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Neurourology Research Division, China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Disease, Beijing, China.
Beijing Tian Tan Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsUsing a selective α-adrenoceptor blocker for medical expulsive therapy (MET) is an effective treatment approach widely used for ureteral stones. The aim of the review was to assess the efficacy and safety of silodosin in medical expulstion therapy compared with placebo and tamsulosin.

methodsA systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials that compared silodosin with a placebo or tamsulosin for ureteral calculi.

resultsEight publications involving a total of 1048 patients were used in the analysis, which compared silodosin with placebo and tamsulosin. We found that silodosin was effective in treating ureteral calculi in our meta-analysis and was superior to tamsulosin in its efficacy. The expulsion rate of all ureteral stones (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.08, 2.36, P = 0.02), the expulsion rate of distal ureteral stones (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.70, 4.67, P < 0.0001) and the expulsion time (days) of distal ureteral stones (standard mean difference (SMD) -4.71, 95% CI -6.60, -2.83, P < 0.00001) indicated that silodosin was more effective than the placebo. Moreover, expulsion rate (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.70, 3.78, P < 0.00001), expulsion time (days) (SMD -2.64, 95% CI -3.64, -1.64, P < 0.00001) and pain episodes (P < 0.00001) indicated that silodosin was more effective than the tamsulosin. Even though silodosin had a significant increase in abnormal ejaculation compared with tamsulosin, no significant differences were observed for complications (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.58, 1.74, P = 1.00).

conclusionsThis meta-analysis indicated that silodosin was superior to placebo or tamsulosin in the efficacy for distal ureteral calculi with better control of pain. The safety profile of silodosin was similar to tamsulosin though retrograde ejaculation was worse for silodosin use. We conclude that silodosin might have potential as a MET for ureteral stones.

Indexed as

Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor AntagonistsHumansIndolesSulfonamidesTamsulosinUreteral CalculiAdrenergic alpha-1 Receptor AntagonistsIndolessilodosinSulfonamidesTamsulosinmedical expulsion therapysilodosinstone and randomized controlled trialsureteral calculiurolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID26255996
PMCPMC4693578
OpenAlexW1950886889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.