SynthesisBMC urology2025
Which combination of medical expulsive therapy is more effective for treatment of distal ureteral stone in adults? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Medical expulsive therapies for ureteric stones: an umbrella review of network meta-analyses with novel evidence grading.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Article
- Ureteral wall thickness at the ureterovesical junction as a significant factor in predicting medical expulsive therapy of ureterovesical junction stones.BMC urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical Expulsive Therapy (MET) has been recommended as an established modality for the treatment of distal ureteral stones due to its clearance rate, pain control, and patient satisfaction while having minimal morbidity in comparison to other urologic interventions. In some studies, a combination of medications has been used, which we assessed in this network meta-analysis (NMA).
methodsWe conducted systematic searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify relevant trials published between 2001 and 2024. We excluded articles that looked at MET for upper ureteral stone passage or after shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). NMA was performed to compare the effect of combination MET on stone expulsion rate (SER), stone expulsion time (SET), and need for analgesia.
resultsWe included 19 studies with 2414 participants. NMA results revealed that the combination MET of α-blockers with PDE-5 inhibitors (OR = 2.7, CI = 1.80,4.05), corticosteroids (OR = 2.7, CI = 1.81,4.13), and phytotherapy (OR: 3.10, CI = 1.62,5.92) were more effective than α-blockers alone in SER. The combination MET of α-blockers with PDE-5 inhibitors (MD: -3.8, CI=-7.0, -0.5) showed significantly lower SET compared to α-blockers alone. Finally, combination MET of α-blockers with PDE-5 inhibitors (MD:1.0, CI = 0.4,1.7) and nifedipine with corticosteroids (MD:1.2, CI = 0.4,1.9) showed a significant decrease in analgesia use.
conclusionsThe combination MET of α-blockers with PDE-5 inhibitors, corticosteroids, and phytotherapy increases the rate of stone clearance 2.7 to 3.1 times more than α-blockers alone. The other benefits of combination MET were lower expulsion time and less analgesia use that needs further studies.
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.