Evidence Hub

Systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of silodosin in treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia patients with lower urinary tract symptoms

C. Yuan, Z. Jian, Yu-Chen Ma, Meng-Hua Wang, Qi-Bo Hu, Lin-Hu Liu, Yushi He, Hong Li et al.

2020

5,985 participants

Abstract

Background: Silodosin is a new high-selective α1A-adrenoceptors antagonist. A systematic review of literature and meta-analysis were performed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety outcomes of silodosin with placebo, tamsulosin, naftopidil and alfuzosin in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) males with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Materials and Methods: We systematically searched literature among EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect and Web of Science databases until April 2019. 18 related randomized controlled trials were included according to eligibility criteria. Random-effects model were applied for data analysis. Results: 5,985 patients were included in our study. Silodosin presented superiority to placebo in improving LUTS and better efficacy than tamsulosin and naftopidil in improving IPSS void subscore and post-void residual urine volume with statistically significance (all P values < 0.05). Greater QoL index improvement were found in silodosin than alfuzosin groups (MD = -0.44, 95%CI: [-0.83, -0.05], P = 0.03) while no differences in total IPSS score and Qmax changes between these two groups. Retrograde ejaculation was significantly frequent in silodosin than placebo, tamsulosin and naftopidil groups (all P values < 0.05). Besides, silodosin increased incidence of upper respiratory tract infection compared to tamsulosin groups (RR = 0.69, 95%CI: [0.50, 0.96], P = 0.03). A higher rate of nasal congestion (RR = 7.76, 95%CI: [1.80,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 5,985 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free