SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2018
Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Which combination of medical expulsive therapy is more effective for treatment of distal ureteral stone in adults? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC urology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled 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
- Ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Desmodium styracifolium Total Flavone Capsules for Urolithiasis: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of α1-adrenergic blockers after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in pediatric kidney stones.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Trial
- Salbutamol for analgesia in renal colic: a prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled phase II trial.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2025Trial
- Optimum combined MET according to tolerability with efficacy, Silodosin Tadalafil versus Silodosin Vardenafil for distal ureteric stone: a prospective, double blinded, randomized clinical trial.International urology and nephrology · 2025Trial
- Risk factors and machine learning-based prediction of difficult ureter during retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Synergistic relaxation of ureteral smooth muscle by doxazosin and vardenafil: experimental implications for medical expulsive therapy.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Determinants of treatment pathway in renal colic: a size-stratified analysis from the emergency department of a tertiary center.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Warm sitz bath as an adjunctive therapy for distal ureteral calculi ≤5 mm: a prospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world effectiveness of total flavonoids fromFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
- Ureteral wall thickness at the ureterovesical junction as a significant factor in predicting medical expulsive therapy of ureterovesical junction stones.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Article
- Summary of the clinical practice guideline for the management of urinary stones, third edition.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Article
- New Lead Schiff Bases Predominantly Mediate Vasorelaxant Activity Through αBiomolecules · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUreteral colic is a common reason for patients to seek medical care. Alpha-blockers are commonly used to improve stone passage through so-called medical expulsive therapy (MET), but their effectiveness remains controversial. This is an update of a 2014 Cochrane review; since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant.
objectivesTo assess effects of alpha-blockers compared with standard therapy for ureteral stones 1 cm or smaller confirmed by imaging in adult patients presenting with symptoms of ureteral stone disease. SEARCH
methodsOn 18 November 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, and Embase. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO Portal/ICTRP to identify all published/unpublished and ongoing trials. We checked all references of included and review articles and conference proceedings for articles relevant to this review. We sent letters to investigators to request information about unpublished or incomplete studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of ureteral stone passage in adult patients that compared alpha-blockers versus standard therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened studies for inclusion and extracted data using standard methodological procedures. We performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were stone clearance and major adverse events; secondary outcomes were stone expulsion time, number of pain episodes, use of diclofenac, hospitalisation, and surgical intervention. We assessed the quality of evidence on a per-outcome basis using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsWe included 67 studies with 10,509 participants overall. Of these, 15 studies with 5787 participants used a placebo.Stone clearance: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may result in a large increase in stone clearance (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 1.55; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that the likely effect is probably smaller (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 116 more (95% CI 51 more to 182 more) stone clearances per 1000 participants.Major adverse events: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may have little effect on major adverse events (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.96; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that alpha-blockers likely increase the risk of major adverse events slightly (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.86), corresponding to 29 more (95% CI 3 more to 75 more) major adverse events per 1000 participants.Patients treated with alpha-blockers may experience shorter stone expulsion times (mean difference (MD) -3.40 days, 95% CI -4.17 to -2.63; low-quality evidence), may use less diclofenac (MD -82.41, 95% CI -122.51 to -42.31; low-quality evidence), and likely require fewer hospitalisations (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 69 fewer hospitalisations (95% CI 93 fewer to 32 fewer) per 1000 participants. Meanwhile, the need for surgical intervention appears similar (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; low-quality evidence), corresponding to 28 fewer surgical interventions (95% CI 51 fewer to 2 more) per 1000 participants.A predefined subgroup analysis (test for subgroup differences; P = 0.002) suggests that effects of alpha-blockers may vary with stone size, with RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.15; P = 0.16; I² = 62%) for stones 5 mm or smaller versus 1.45 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.72; P < 0.0001; I² = 59%) for stones larger than 5 mm. We found no evidence suggesting possible subgroup effects based on stone location or alpha-blocker type. AUTHORS'
conclusionsFor patients with ureteral stones, alpha-blockers likely increase stone clearance but probably also slightly increase the risk of major adverse events. Subgroup analyses suggest that alpha-blockers may be less effective for smaller (5 mm or smaller) than for larger stones (greater than 5 mm).
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.