SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2016
Alpha blockers for treatment of ureteric stones: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05150899 (Comparative Study Between Use of Alpha Blocker Versus Alpha Blocker and Antihistaminic in Management of Acute Renal Colic Prevent Pain Recurrence and Increase Expulsion Rate of Ureteric Stone ≤ 1cm), which is not on this map. Cited by 49 papers, 11 of them syntheses 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.
Comparative Study Between Use of Alpha Blocker Versus Alpha Blocker and Antihistaminic in Management of Acute Renal Colic Prevent Pain Recurrence and Increase Expulsion Rate of Ureteric Stone ≤ 1cm
Who cites it
49 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 141 citations in OpenAlex.
- The influence of pre-stenting and drugs on the outcomes of ureteroscopy for kidney and ureteral stone disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis by the EAU Section of Endourology.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- The use of alpha-adrenergic antagonists in pediatric nephrolithiasis: a systematic review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- The safety and efficacy of doxazosin in medical expulsion therapy for distal ureteric calculi: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Alpha-blockers after shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy of 22 drug interventions as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Urolithiasis · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled analysis of the efficacy and safety of adjunctive alpha-blocker therapy before ureteroscopy in the management of ureteral stones.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Pooled it
- Ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Meta-analysis of the efficacy of sexual intercourse for distal ureteric stones.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Pooled it
- Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Silodosin versus tamsulosin for medical expulsive treatment of ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Comparison of efficacy of three commonly used alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureter stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyPooled it
- Effect of Tamsulosin on Passage of Symptomatic Ureteral Stones: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Trial
- Effect of Adjuvant Silodosin on Stone Clearance After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones: A Randomised Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy of alpha-blockers in medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials between 2010 and 2025.Arab journal of urology · 2026Review
- Current Perspectives on Urolithiasis: Pathogenesis, Clinical Management, and Treatment.Cureus · 2026Review
- Kidney stone disease: risk factors, pathophysiology and management.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2025Review
- Ureteral Wall Thickness Measurement and Spontaneous Stone Passage A Narrative Review.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- History of Renal Stone Surgery: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Audit of the Acute Management of Renal Colic in District Hospitals Within a National Health Service Trust.Cureus · 2024Article
- Deciding on a novel predictive value to gauge how well patients with lower ureteric stones respond to medical expulsive therapy.Urolithiasis · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of alpha blockers in the treatment of patients with ureteric stones.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, LILACS, and Medline databases and scientific meeting abstracts to July 2016. REVIEW
methodsRandomized controlled trials of alpha blockers compared with placebo or control for treatment of ureteric stones were eligible. : Two team members independently extracted data from each included study. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who passed their stone. Secondary outcomes were the time to passage; the number of pain episodes; and the proportions of patients who underwent surgery, required admission to hospital, and experienced an adverse event. Pooled risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the primary outcome with profile likelihood random effects models. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and the GRADE approach were used to evaluate the quality of evidence and summarize conclusions.
results55 randomized controlled trials were included. There was moderate quality evidence that alpha blockers facilitate passage of ureteric stones (risk ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 1.61). Based on a priori subgroup analysis, there seemed to be no benefit to treatment with alpha blocker among patients with smaller ureteric stones (1.19, 1.00 to 1.48). Patients with larger stones treated with an alpha blocker, however, had a 57% higher risk of stone passage compared with controls (1.57, 1.17 to 2.27). The effect of alpha blockers was independent of stone location (1.48 (1.05 to 2.10) for upper or middle stones; 1.49 (1.38 to 1.63) for lower stones). Compared with controls, patients who received alpha blockers had significantly shorter times to stone passage (mean difference -3.79 days, -4.45 to -3.14; moderate quality evidence), fewer episodes of pain (-0.74 episodes, -1.28 to -0.21; low quality evidence), lower risks of surgical intervention (risk ratio 0.44, 0.37 to 0.52; moderate quality evidence), and lower risks of admission to hospital (0.37, 0.22 to 0.64; moderate quality evidence). The risk of a serious adverse event was similar between treatment and control groups (1.49, 0.24 to 9.35; low quality evidence).
conclusionsAlpha blockers seem efficacious in the treatment of patients with ureteric stones who are amenable to conservative management. The greatest benefit might be among those with larger stones. These results support current guideline recommendations advocating a role for alpha blockers in patients with ureteric stones. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration No CRD42015024169.
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.