The role of solifenacin, as monotherapy or combination with tamsulosin in ureteral stent-related symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

purposeUreteral stenting is associated with various morbidity and reduced quality of life. We systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of solifenacin as monotherapy, or combined therapy with tamsulosin versus control or tamsulosin monotherapy in stent-related symptoms (SRSs). MATERIALS AND

methodsRandomized controlled trials evaluating solifenacin or its combination with tamsulosin for the treatment of SRSs were identified via a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Embase, Ovid, The Cochrane Library and relevant sources up to February 2017. Ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ) and drug-related complications were pooled for meta-analysis. Mean difference and risk difference were calculated as appropriate for each outcome to determine the cumulative effect size.

resultsThere were 10 studies involving 1786 participants finally eligible in the quantitative analysis. Solifenacin monotherapy significantly reduced the total score of USSQ [MD -14.90; 95% CI (-25.19, -4.60); P = 0.005], as well as indexes of urinary symptoms, body pain, general health, sexual performance, and hematuria (P = 0.02, P = 0.009, P = 0.004, P = 0.02, P = 0.02, respectively), but the differences were insignificant when compared with tamsulosin except improved sexual performance (P = 0.004). Combined therapy of solifenacin and tamsulosin showed no beneficial effects in all indexes of USSQ over solifenacin monotherapy. Only slightly higher incidence of dry mouth (P = 0.02) was found with solifenacin versus control.

conclusionsThe result demonstrates the safety and efficacy of solifenacin in reducing SRSs, but no significant advantage was found over tamsulosin. In addition, combination of solifenacin and tamsulosin did not show beneficial effects over solifenacin monotherapy. More high quality trials are warranted to further address this issue, however.