Evidence Hub

Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of Silodosin in Medical Expulsive Therapy for the Management of Ureteral Stones – Based on Indian Evidences

Balakrishnan Sadasivam, Santenna Chenchula, Avik Ray

Biomedical & Pharmacology Journal, 2021

1,064 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Urolithiasis is quite a common disorder affecting around two million people in India every year. Minimally invasive therapies are effective treatment measures in most of the cases. However, a watchful waiting approach with pharmacotherapy promotes the expulsion of stones in a shorter time. We hereby review the efficacy and safety of silodosin, a selective α-1A adrenoceptor antagonist, in medical expulsive therapy for the management of urolithiasis based on the evidences in Indian population. Methods: Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) keywords which were used to systematically search electronic databases: PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to February 2020 were “Silodosin”, “Ureteral calculi”, “Medical expulsive therapy”, “India”, “randomised controlled trials” and “prospective observational studies”. A total of 29 relevant studies could be found and were included in our analysis. Results: The primary outcomes considered were the stone expulsion rate (SER) and stone expulsion time (SET) along with pain episodes and safety outcomes like orthostatic hypotension and retrograde ejaculation. Eight studies with a total of 1064 patients were identified as evidences considering Indian population which compared silodosin with controls like tamsulosin or tadalafil. Conclusions: Silodosin is highly effective in Indian population for increasing stone expulsion for those with ureteral stones (distal ureteral stones with diameter ≥5 mm and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, 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: 1,064 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