ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the use of solifenacin and trospium in treatment of overactive bladder (OAB).Methods This prospective study was conducted on patients diagnosed with OAB who presenting to the Department of urology,Changzhou No.3 People's Hospital between March 2015 and May 2016.Patients were randomized into 2 groups.Group A (n =40) received 5 mg solifenacin once daily,while Group B (n =39) received 20 mg trospium twice daily.All the patients' OAB symptom scores (OABSS) in weeks 0,4,and 12 were recorded.In addition,side effects of the drugs were evaluated.Results Average OABSS was determined as:9.3 ± 2.6 (Group A) and 10.2±1.9 (Group B) at week0;2.5±1.3 (GroupA) and 2.7±1.4 (Group B) at week4;and 1.4±0.5 (Group A) and 1.3 ± 0.6 (Group B) at week 12.In addition,no statistically significant difference was found between the scores (P =0.084,P =0.512 and P =0.423).The discontinuation rate of medication due to its side effects was 0 (0％) for Group A,and 5 (12.8％) for Group B.Intragroup changes in the scores 0 weeks-4 weeks,0 weeks-12 weeks and 4 weeks-12 weeks values was statistically significant in both groups (P =0.000).Conclusion No significant difference was found between the OABSS of these 2 drugs.However,discontinuation of drugs due to side effects was more frequent in trospium.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the clinical effects and safety of spiral stone basket assisted with FURL in the treatment of unilateral upper ureteral stones for diameter>1.0 cm. Methods 140 patients with unilateral upper ureteral stones for diameter>1.0 cm from January 2012 to December 2015 were randomly divided into control group (70 patients) with FURL used alone and observation group (70 patients) with spiral stone basket assisted application on the basis of control group;the perioperative clinical indicators, the lithotripsy success rate, the stone clearance rate, the stone removal rate and the postoperative complication incidence of both groups were compared. Results The operation time of observation group was signiifcantly longer than control group (P0.05). The lithotripsy success rate and the stone clearance rate of observation group was signiifcantly higher than control group (P 0.05). The total treatment expenses of observation group was signiifcantly fewer than control group (P1.0 cm can efifciently higher the stone removal effects, reduce the stone removal risk and not increase the postoperative complications incidence.