Effects of tolterodine combined tamsulosin on ureteral stent related symptoms

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2019.03.011

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To evaluate the effects of Tolterodine and Tamsulosin in improving symptoms in patients with indwelling double-J ureteral stents.

Method

From Nov 2017 to Apr 2018, patients with insertion of a double-J ureteral stent (D-J stent) after ureteroscopy lithotripsy were prospectively randomized into three groups. Group 1 received Tamsulosin 0.4 mg per-night, Group 2 received Tamsulosin 0.4 mg per-night and Tolterodine 2 mg bid, Group 3 is the control group. All patients completed OABSS (Overactive Bladder Symptom Score) and VAS (visual analogue scale) scores the second day after the surgery, and again before D-J stent removal.

Result

A total of 116 patients were enrolled. 39 patients in group 1, 39 patients in group 2 and 38 patients in group 3. There was no statistically significant difference in background characteristics between the three groups. The most important and statistically significant results were Tolterodine combined Tamsulosin and Tamsulosin reduced OABSS and VAS. Scere Further. Tolterodine combined Tamsulosin reduced OABSS score more than Tamsulosin only. No side-effect was happened.

Conclusion

Tolterodine combined Tamsulosin can improve a subset of stent-related urinary symptoms and flank pain. The effect of relieve storage symptoms is better than that of tamsoloxine alone, and it has good safety. But the effect of relieve backache is similar with that of tamsoloxine alone.

Key words: Tamsulosin, Tolterodine, Double J stent, Score, Prospective

Weichao Tu, Junwei Pan, Dawei Wang, Guoliang Lu, Qin Gao, Yuan Shao. Effects of tolterodine combined tamsulosin on ureteral stent related symptoms[J]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(03): 187-190.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhqjmnmwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2019.03.011

https://zhqjmnmwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2019/V13/I03/187

Figures/Tables 3

References 15

[1]	Zimskind PD, Fetter TR, Wilkerson JL. Clinical use of long-term indwelling silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted cystoscopically[J]. J Urol, 1967, 97(5): 840-844.
[2]	Miguel MA, Leopoldo GA, Rene JG, et al. Efficacy of Tamsulosin, Oxybutynin, and their combination in the control of double-j stent-related lower urinary tract symptoms[J]. Int Braz J Urol, 2016, 42(3): 487-493.
[3]	Kwon JK, Kang SC, Oh CK, et al. The beneficial effect of alpha-blockers for ureteral stent-related discomfort: systematic review and network meta-analysis for alfuzosin versustamsulosin versus placebo[J]. BMC Urol, 2015, 15 (1): 1-10.
[4]	Shalaby E, Ahmed AF, Maarouf A, et al. Randomized controlled trial to compare the safety and efficacy of tamsulosin,solifenacin, and combination of both in treatment of double-jstent-related lower urinary symptoms[J]. Adv Urol, 2013, 2013: 752382.
[5]	Tehranchi A, Rezaei Y, Khalkhali H, et al. Effects of terazosin and tolterodine on ureteral stent related symptoms: a doubleblind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial[J]. Int Braz J Urol，2013, 39(6): 832-840.
[6]	Joshi HB, Newns N, Stainthorpe A, et al. Ureteral stent symptom questionnaire: development and validation of a multidimensional quality of life measure[J]. J Urol, 2003, 169(3): 1060-1064.
[7]	Lange D, Bidnur S, Hoag N, et al. Ureteral stent-associated complications-where we are and where we are going[J]. Nat Rev Urol, 2015, 12(1): 17-25.
[8]	Dellis AE, Keeley FX Jr, Manolas V, et al. Role of α-blockers in the treatment of stent-related symptoms: a prospective randomized control study[J]. Urology, 2014, 83(1): 56-61.
[9]	Kwon JK, Kang SC, Oh CK, et al. The beneficial effect of alpha-blockers for ureteral stent-related discomfort: systematic review and network meta-analysis for alfuzosin versus tamsulosin[J]. Bmc Urology, 2015, 15(1): 1-10.
[10]	El-Nahas AR, Tharwat M, Elsaadany M, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing alpha blocker (tamsulosin) and anticholinergic (solifenacin) in treatment of ureteral stentrelated symptoms[J]. World J Urol, 2016, 34(7): 963-968.
[11]	Wang J, Zhang X, Zhang T, et al. The role of solifenacin, as monotherapy or combination with tamsulosin in ureteral stent-related symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. World J Urol， 2017, 35(11): 1669-1680.
[12]	王荣，章小平，陈伟军, 等. α1联合M受体阻滞剂在输尿管镜碎石术后双J管综合征防治中的应用[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2014, 8(1): 23-26.
[13]	Park J, Yoo C, Han DH, et al. A critical assessment of the effects of tamsulosin and solifenacin as monotherapies and as a combination therapy for the treatment of ureteral stent-relate[J]. World J Urol 2015, 33(11): 1833-1840.
[14]	Aggarwal SP, Priyadarshi S, Tomar V, et al. A randomized controlled trial to compare the safety and efficacy of tadalafil and tamsulosin in relieving double j stent related symptoms[J]. Adv Urol, 2015: 592175.
[15]	Bhattar R, Tomar V, Yadav SS, et al. Comparison of safety and efficacy of silodosin, solifenacin, tadalafil and their combinations in the treatment of double-J stent- related lower urinary system symptoms: A prospective randomized trial[J]. Turk J Urol, 2018, 44(3): 228-238.

组别	性别（例）		年龄（岁，±s）	身高（cm，±s）	结石大小（mm，±s）	OABSS评分（分，±s）	符合OAB诊断标准（例）	VAS评分（分，±s）
组别	男	女	年龄（岁，±s）	身高（cm，±s）	结石大小（mm，±s）	OABSS评分（分，±s）	符合OAB诊断标准（例）	VAS评分（分，±s）
组1	27	12	49±10	168±8	10.7±2.5	5.3±1.8	15	4.5±1.5
组2	25	14	49±11	169±7	9.9±1.9	5.5±1.3	16	4.8±1.4
组3	25	13	48±12	167±6	10.9±2.4	5.2±1.7	11	4.7±1.3
统计值	χ²=0.239		F=0.269	F=1.039	F=1.946	F=0.879	χ²=1.012	F=0.301
P值	0.888		0.764	0.357	0.148	0.418	0.603	0.741

组别	性别（例）		年龄（岁，±s）	身高（cm，±s）	结石大小（mm，±s）	OABSS评分（分，±s）	符合OAB诊断标准（例）	VAS评分（分，±s）
组别	男	女	年龄（岁，±s）	身高（cm，±s）	结石大小（mm，±s）	OABSS评分（分，±s）	符合OAB诊断标准（例）	VAS评分（分，±s）
组1	27	12	49±10	168±8	10.7±2.5	5.3±1.8	15	4.5±1.5
组2	25	14	49±11	169±7	9.9±1.9	5.5±1.3	16	4.8±1.4
组3	25	13	48±12	167±6	10.9±2.4	5.2±1.7	11	4.7±1.3
统计值	χ²=0.239		F=0.269	F=1.039	F=1.946	F=0.879	χ²=1.012	F=0.301
P值	0.888		0.764	0.357	0.148	0.418	0.603	0.741

?	OABSS评分（分，±s）			符合OAB诊断标准数（例）			VAS评分（分，±s）
?	组1	组2	组3	组1	组2	组3	组1	组2	组3
基线	5.3±1.8	5.5±1.3	5.2±1.7	15	16	11	4.5±1.5	4.8±1.4	4.7±1.3
拔管前	3.5±1.8	3.0±1.2	5.1±1.7	07	04	13	3.8±1.3	3.8±1.2	4.5±1.4
统计值	t=5.322	t=8.958	t=0.941	χ²=4.052^*	χ²=9.683^*	χ²=2.244^*	t=3.173	t=6.488	t=1.845
P值	0	0	0.35	0.044^*	0.002^*	0.62^*	0.003	0	0.073

?	OABSS评分（分，±s）			符合OAB诊断标准数（例）			VAS评分（分，±s）
?	组1	组2	组3	组1	组2	组3	组1	组2	组3
基线	5.3±1.8	5.5±1.3	5.2±1.7	15	16	11	4.5±1.5	4.8±1.4	4.7±1.3
拔管前	3.5±1.8	3.0±1.2	5.1±1.7	07	04	13	3.8±1.3	3.8±1.2	4.5±1.4
统计值	t=5.322	t=8.958	t=0.941	χ²=4.052^*	χ²=9.683^*	χ²=2.244^*	t=3.173	t=6.488	t=1.845
P值	0	0	0.35	0.044^*	0.002^*	0.62^*	0.003	0	0.073

组别	例数	OABSS评分	VAS评分
组1	39	1.5±1.8	0.7±1.4
组2	39	2.4±1.7	1.0±1.5
t值	?	-2.347	-0.926
P值	?	0.022	0.357

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export