Evidence Hub

The Beneficial Effects of Alpha-Blockers, Antimuscarinics, Beta 3-Agonist, and PDE5-Inhibitors for Ureteral Stent-Related Discomfort: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from KSER Update Series

Moon YJ, Chung DY, Kim DK, Jung HD, Jeon SH, Kang SH, Paick S, Lee JY et al.

Medicina, 2025

1,865 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Ureteral stents are widely used in the field of urology but can cause varying degrees of side effects. This study utilized a network meta-analysis to evaluate stent-related discomfort (SRD) in patients with alpha-blockers (alfuzosin, tamsulosin, and silodosin), antimuscarinics (solifenacin), beta 3-agonists (mirabegron), and phosphodiesterase 5-inhibitors (tadalafil) versus a placebo. Materials and Methods: Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 2006 to 2021 were identified from electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. The following identifiers were included to assess the urinary symptom score (USS): participants (patients with ureteral stents), interventions (patients who took medication for stent discomfort), and outcomes (comparisons of the Ureteric Stent Symptoms Questionnaire (USSQ)). We also executed an independent quality assessment using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Results: A total of 16 RCTs were identified, and they included 1865 patients. Compared with the placebo, mirabegron (mean difference (MD): −3.87; 95% confidence interval (CI): −10.6–2.35), tadalafil (MD: −4.47; 95% CI: −10.8–1.63), and silodosin (MD: −4.02; 95% CI: −12–4.01) did not show significant differences to the placebo, whereas others did. Alfuzosin, mirabegron, silodosin, solifenacin, and tadalafil were not inferior to tamsulosin in terms of the USS using Bayesian analyses. In the random effect model,…

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: 1,865 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