ReviewNature reviews. Urology2016
Medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones: where do we go from here?
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy of 22 drug interventions as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Urolithiasis · 2020Pooled it
- Synergistic relaxation of ureteral smooth muscle by doxazosin and vardenafil: experimental implications for medical expulsive therapy.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Does preoperative tamsulosin facilitate semirigid ureteroscopic management of lower ureteric calculi? A prospective, randomized double-blind study.Current urology · 2025Article
- Knowledge‑map Analysis of Ureteroscopy for Urolithiasis.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Review
- Meta-analysis of the efficacy and adverse drug reactions of adrenergic alpha-antagonists in treating children with ureteral calculi.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones: Analysing the evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analysis of powered double-blinded randomised controlled trials.Arab journal of urology · 2017Review
- Some Work on the Diagnosis and Management of Kidney Stones with Ultrasound.Acoustics today · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite two decades of clinical use, the effectiveness of medical expulsive therapy (MET) for the noninvasive management of patients with ureteral stones has, in the past year, been called into in question. The primary aim of MET is to expedite stone passage, although it has also shown effectiveness in reducing time to stone passage, thus reducing the incidence of colic episodes, improving stone clearance and improving patients' quality of life. At least 11 systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been published showing clinical benefits of MET; however, the results of these analyses have been challenged by data from two randomized controlled, multicentre trials with large patient cohorts, thus providing higher quality evidence that MET is ineffective in patients with ureteral stones. Results of the various systematic reviews and meta-analyses have suggested that MET is effective, however, such analyses incorporate the biases and limitations of smaller cohort studies, resulting in their conclusions being based upon lower-quality evidence. Evidence for the use of MET for small (<5 mm) distal ureteral stones has weakened based on clinical trial data published in 2015. However, MET might remain effective in the management of larger ureteral stones (>5 mm).
Indexed as
Identifiers
27480950What 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.