Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
5694609 | European Urology | 2017 | 4 Pages |
Abstract
Medical expulsive therapy (MET), in particular α-blockers, have been recommended as supportive medication if observational treatment of a ureteral stone was an option. Over the years, a considerable number of randomized controlled trials (RCT) as well as several meta-analyses have been published on MET, supporting the use of α-blockers. However, several recently published high quality, large, placebo-controlled randomized trials raised serious doubts about the effectiveness of α-blockers. The contradictory results of meta-analyses of small RCTs versus the findings of large, well conducted multicenter trials show the methodological vulnerability of meta-analyses, in particular if small single center, lower quality, papers have been included. Small single center trials, for instance, tend to show larger treatment effects compared to multicenter RCTs. It also shows the responsibility of careful planning when conducting a RCT. Trial registration as a prerequisite for approval by ethics committees could in addition minimize publication bias. Weighting the current evidence on whether to use MET, or not, it seems that in distal ureteral stones larger than 5 mm, there may be a potential therapeutic benefit for the use of α-blockers. Patients should be informed about the possible, but as yet unproven benefit of using α-blockers in this situation, as well as their off-label use and potential side effects.
Keywords
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health
Authors
Christian Türk, Thomas Knoll, Christian Seitz, Andreas Skolarikos, Chris Chapple, Sam McClinton, on behalf of the European Association of Urology on behalf of the European Association of Urology,