ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Introduction: The efficacy of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy (MET) is well established. However, it is not known which of the three most commonly used alpha-blockers (tamsulosin, alfuzosin and silodosin) is the most efficacious. With this study we aimed to assess the efficacy of the three commonly used alpha-blockers as MET for distal ureter stones. Materials and Methods: For this review, we searched multiple databases such as PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, OviD SP, CINAHL, and web of science to identify all the relevant randomized studies comparing the efficacy of tamsulosin, alfuzosin, and silodosin. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews for network meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) were followed while conducting this review and the study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020175706). Results: In this review, 31 studies with 7077 patients were included. Compared to placebo all the treatment groups were more effective for both stone expulsion rate (SER) and stone expulsion time (SET). For both SER and SET, silodosin had the highest SUCRA (94.8 and 90.4) values followed by alfuzosin (58.8 and 64.9) and tamsulosin (46.2 and 44.5). The incidence of postural hypotension was similar with all the drugs, whereas, the incidence of retrograde ejaculation was significantly higher for silodosin. Overall confidence for each comparison group in this review ranged from "very low" to "moderate" according to the CINeMA approach. Conclusion: Among the three commonly used alpha-blockers silodosin is the most efficacious drug as MET for lower ureter stones followed by alfuzosin and tamsulosin.
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Introduction: There is an ongoing need to identify various pathological factors that can predict various survival parameters in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). With this review, we aim to scrutinize the impact of several pathological factors on recurrence free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with UTUC. Materials and Methods: Systematic electronic literature search of various databases was conducted for this review. Studies providing multivariate hazard ratios (HR) for various pathological factors such as tumor margin, necrosis, stage, grade, location, architecture, lymph node status, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), carcinoma in situ (CIS), multifocality and variant histology as predictor of survival parameters were included and pooled analysis of HR was performed. Results: In this review, 63 studies with 35.714 patients were included. For RFS, all except tumor location (HR 0.94, p=0.60) and necrosis (HR 1.00, p=0.98) were associated with worst survival. All the pathological variables except tumor location (HR 0.95, p=0.66) were associated with worst CSS. For OS, only presence of CIS (HR 1.03, p=0.73) and tumor location (HR 1.05, p=0.74) were not predictor of survival. Conclusions: We noted tumor grade, stage, presence of LVI, lymph node metastasis, hydronephrosis, variant histology, sessile architecture, margin positivity and multifocality were associated with poor RFS, CSS and OS. Presence of CIS was associated with poor RFS and CSS but not OS. Tumor necrosis was associated with worst CSS and OS but not RFS. Tumor location was not a predictor of any of the survival parameters.