Trial reportUrolithiasis2025
Safety and efficacy of Silodosin as medical expulsive therapy after shock wave lithotripsy in paediatric patients with renal stones.
Trial report in Urolithiasis, 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.
- Effect of Adjuvant Silodosin on Stone Clearance After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones: A Randomised Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of Silodosin as a medical expulsive therapy following shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in paediatric patients with renal stones. In this prospective randomized controlled study conducted at Tanta University Hospital from January 2022 to March 2024, thirty children with a single de novo radiopaque renal pelvic stone less than 2 cm scheduled for SWL were randomized into two equal groups. Group A (n = 15) received Silodosin 4 mg once daily after the first SWL session, and Group B (n = 15) received a matching placebo. The first dose was administered on the night of the initial SWL session and continued until stone-free status was confirmed, for a maximum of 4 weeks. The stone expulsion time was set as a primary outcome, while the secondary outcomes were one-session stone-free rate (SFR), postoperative pain scores, and Silodosin related adverse events. The results showed that the mean stone expulsion time in group A (11.4 ± 1.8 days) was significantly shorter compared to group B (16.4 ± 1.6 days; P < 0.0001). One-session SFR was 86.6% in Silodosin group compared to 73.3% in Placebo group (P = 0.6). Pain visual analogue scores were significantly lower in group A (2.31 ± 1.75) than in group B (5.08 ± 2.43; P = 0.003). No severe drug-related adverse effects were reported in either group. In conclusion, Silodosin appears to be a safe and effective adjunct to SWL in paediatric patients, significantly reducing stone expulsion time and postoperative pain. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.