Recommendations of apex health bodies remain localized: not in conformity with international implementation policy for urological disorders.

In developing/underdeveloped countries there is still a great burden of adverse drug reaction (ADR), morbidity and mortality because of poor regulations and implementation of preventive measures. These countries try to copy/follow guidelines from international bodies like American Urology Association (AUA), European Association of Urology (EAU), AGS, UMC and WHO irrespective of their country of origin and success in implementation. Although recommendations of these organizations are obligatory, yet these are taken as the gold standard for good clinical practices. This manuscript highlights difference in view point of various apex health organizations in formulating health policies for prevention, diagnosis, treatment and ADR monitoring for urological disorders. Lacking role of regulatory bodies in implementation of existing policies may lead to potentially inappropriate medication and produce a great economic burden. This analysis has prompted us to recommend that these apex bodies should have better coordination in producing a single value document, make it mandatory part of curricula in medical schools for better awareness, awareness campaigns and separate reporting column in ADR form.

Comparative efficacy of tamsulosin versus tadalafil as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the relative efficacy of tamsulosin and tadalafil as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study performed between December 2014 and February 2016. A total of 123 adult patients (>18 years of age) presenting with distal ureteric stones sized 6-10 mm were randomized to treatment with tamsulosin 0.4 mg once daily (Group A) or tadalafil10 mg once daily (Group B). Therapy was given for a maximum of 4 weeks. The stone expulsion rate was the primary endpoint. Time to stone expulsion, number of colic episodes, analgesic use, number of hospital visits for pain, endoscopic treatment, and adverse effects of the drugs were noted. Statistical analyses were done using Fisher's exact test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients were included in tamsulosin group and 62 patients in tadalafil group. A statistically insignificant difference was found for stone clearance rate between both groups as a whole (Group A-73.77%, Group B-69.35%, P = 0.690) as well as when we considered both subgroups (A1-78.05%, B1-75.0%, P = 0.802; A2-65.0%, B2-55.6%, P = 0.741). All the primary and secondary outcome measures were more in favour of stones ≤8 mm size than stones >8 mm size. No statistical difference was found for adverse drug effects except for retrograde ejaculation, which was significantly high in tamsulosin group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that although tamsulosin is more effective for stone clearance than tadalafil, but this difference was not significant (P = 0.690).