Evidence Hub

Efficacy of alpha-blockers in medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials between 2010 and 2025

Almaghthawi MM, Alotaibi EA, Alotaibi MS, Alomari RW, Alsulami YD, Alahamdi MA, Aljaddua SIS, Alruhaili WAA et al.

Arab journal of urology, 2026

4,256 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction: Alpha-blockers are widely used in medical expulsive therapy (MET) for ureteral stones; however, the current evidence regarding their comparative effectiveness remains inconsistent. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different alpha-blockers in facilitating ureteral stone passage and identify factors influencing treatment outcomes.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2010 and 2025. We searched multiple databases for studies comparing alpha-blockers with control interventions or other alpha-blockers for ureteral stones ≤10 mm. Primary outcome was stone expulsion rate; secondary outcomes included time to expulsion, pain episodes, analgesic use, and adverse events. We performed subgroup analyses by alpha-blocker type, stone size, location, and treatment duration. Network meta-analysis assessed comparative effectiveness between agents.

Results: Twenty-nine RCTs with a total of 4,256 patients were included. Alpha-blockers significantly increased stone expulsion rates compared to controls (70.9% vs. 56.5%; RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.20-1.32; Number Needed to Treat (NNT) = 7) and reduced expulsion time by approximately three-days. Efficacy was greatest for distal ureteral stones (RR 1.52; Number Needed to Treat (NNT) = 4) and stones 5-10 mm (RR 1.35; NNT = 6). Network meta-analysis revealed efficacy ranking favoring at first terazosin, followed by doxazosin then, silodosin then,…

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: 4,256 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