Trial reportInternational urology and nephrology2025
Optimum combined MET according to tolerability with efficacy, Silodosin Tadalafil versus Silodosin Vardenafil for distal ureteric stone: a prospective, double blinded, randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in International urology and nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the optimum combination therapy of Silodosin-Tadalafil versus Silodosin-Vardenafil in terms of both tolerability and efficacy for the management of distal ureteric stones.
methodsThis prospective, double blinded, randomized clinical trial included 140 patients with distal ureteric stones, randomized into two groups: Group I (n = 67) received Silodosin 8 mg once daily combined with Tadalafil 5 mg once daily, and Group II (n = 68) received Silodosin 8 mg once daily combined with Vardenafil 10 mg once daily. The primary outcome was the tolerability of the combination therapies, assessed through the incidence of adverse events. Secondary outcomes included stone expulsion rate, expulsion time, and the need for analgesics.
resultsBoth combination therapies demonstrated similar efficacy, with no significant differences in stone expulsion rate (70.1% vs. 67.6%, P = 0.754), expulsion time (19 ± 3 days for both groups, P = 0.793), and analgesic requirements (P > 0.05). However, the Silodosin-Tadalafil combination showed a significantly lower occurrence of adverse events, with notable differences in headache (23.9% vs. 57.4%, P < 0.001), dizziness (32.8% vs. 60.3%, P = 0.001), and gastrointestinal upset (9% vs. 66.2%, P < 0.001), and other adverse effects. The overall occurrence of any adverse event was significantly lower in the Silodosin-Tadalafil group (88.1% vs. 98.5%, P = 0.017).
conclusionsBoth Silodosin-Tadalafil and Silodosin-Vardenafil therapies are effective in managing distal ureteric stones. However, the Silodosin-Tadalafil combination is associated with a significantly lower incidence of adverse events, making it a more tolerable option for patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39105968What 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.