Medical expulsive therapy in adults with ureteric colic: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

نویسندگان

  • Robert Pickard
  • Kathryn Starr
  • Graeme MacLennan
  • Thomas Lam
  • Ruth Thomas
  • Jennifer Burr
  • Gladys McPherson
  • Alison McDonald
  • Kenneth Anson
  • James N'Dow
  • Neil Burgess
  • Terry Clark
  • Mary Kilonzo
  • Katie Gillies
  • Kirsty Shearer
  • Charles Boachie
  • Sarah Cameron
  • John Norrie
  • Samuel McClinton
چکیده

BACKGROUND Meta-analyses of previous randomised controlled trials concluded that the smooth muscle relaxant drugs tamsulosin and nifedipine assisted stone passage for people managed expectantly for ureteric colic, but emphasised the need for high-quality trials with wide inclusion criteria. We aimed to fulfil this need by testing effectiveness of these drugs in a standard clinical care setting. METHODS For this multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited adults (aged 18-65 years) undergoing expectant management for a single ureteric stone identified by CT at 24 UK hospitals. Participants were randomly assigned by a remote randomisation system to tamsulosin 400 μg, nifedipine 30 mg, or placebo taken daily for up to 4 weeks, using an algorithm with centre, stone size (≤5 mm or >5 mm), and stone location (upper, mid, or lower ureter) as minimisation covariates. Participants, clinicians, and trial personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who did not need further intervention for stone clearance within 4 weeks of randomisation, analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population defined as all eligible patients for whom we had primary outcome data. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT number 2010-019469-26, and as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number 69423238. FINDINGS Between Jan 11, 2011, and Dec 20, 2013, we randomly assigned 1167 participants, 1136 (97%) of whom were included in the primary analysis (17 were excluded because of ineligibility and 14 participants were lost to follow-up). 303 (80%) of 379 participants in the placebo group did not need further intervention by 4 weeks, compared with 307 (81%) of 378 in the tamsulosin group (adjusted risk difference 1·3% [95% CI -5·7 to 8·3]; p=0·73) and 304 (80%) of 379 in the nifedipine group (0·5% [-5·6 to 6·5]; p=0·88). No difference was noted between active treatment and placebo (p=0·78), or between tamsulosin and nifedipine (p=0·77). Serious adverse events were reported in three participants in the nifedipine group (one had right loin pain, diarrhoea, and vomiting; one had malaise, headache, and chest pain; and one had severe chest pain, difficulty breathing, and left arm pain) and in one participant in the placebo group (headache, dizziness, lightheadedness, and chronic abdominal pain). INTERPRETATION Tamsulosin 400 μg and nifedipine 30 mg are not effective at decreasing the need for further treatment to achieve stone clearance in 4 weeks for patients with expectantly managed ureteric colic. FUNDING UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Comparative efficacy of tadalafil versus tamsulosin as the medical expulsive therapy in lower ureteric stone: a prospective randomized trial

INTRODUCTION In recent years, medical expulsive therapy has been used in the management of distal ureteric stones as a supplement to conservative treatment. Therefore, we conducted a prospective randomized study to evaluate the possible role of tadalafil individually in comparison with proven tamsulosin therapy in ureteric stone expulsion. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and effi...

متن کامل

Ureteric colic: evidence empowers responsible treatment

www.thelancet.com Vol 386 July 25, 2015 315 The urological community has for decades pursued studies of so-called off -label drugs—ie, pharmaceutical agents used for an unapproved or unintended indication—for treatment of urolithiasis. But perhaps urologists should question why the pharmaceutical industry has not expressed an interest in drug development for this indication. Most urologists mig...

متن کامل

Medical Expulsive Therapy in Acute Colic are We Justified?

Medical expulsive therapy (MET) is one of the most common conservative modality of treatment offered by general practitioners for ureteric colic and calculi. In many occasions, such treatment may have beneficial effect, but might be counter-productive, if offered inappropriately. We report a case of unilateral pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction with a large, redundant, extra renal pelvis that ...

متن کامل

Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalized adults (SUSPEND), a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of a calcium-channel blocker (nifedipine) and an a-blocker (tamsulosin): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Urinary stone disease is common, with an estimated prevalence among the general population of 2% to 3%. Ureteric stones can cause severe pain and have a significant impact on quality of life, accounting for over 15,000 hospital admissions in England annually. Uncomplicated cases of smaller stones in the lower ureter are traditionally treated expectantly. Those who fail standard care...

متن کامل

Is there a role for tamsulosin in the treatment of distal ureteral stones

38 Background 39 Numerous randomised trials have confirmed the efficacy of medical expulsive therapy with 40 tamsulosin in patients with distal ureteral stones. However, to date, no randomised, double41 blind, placebo-controlled trials have been performed. 42 Objective 43 The objective of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy of medical expulsive therapy with 44 tamsulosin in a randomised, do...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • The Lancet

دوره 386  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2015