Urological Science

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2022  |  Volume : 33  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 19--25

A comparative study of the efficacy of silodosin versus tamsulosin versus oral hydration therapy in medical expulsion therapy for ureteral calculi


Dilip Kumar Pal, Ankit Kumar, Debansu Sarkar 
 Department of Urology, Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Correspondence Address:
Prof. Dilip Kumar Pal
Department of Urology, Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, 244, AJC Bose Road, Kolkata - 700 020, West Bengal
India

Purpose: The use of various alpha-receptor antagonists (α-blocker) drugs as medical expulsive therapy (MET) for spontaneous clearance of ureteral calculi of various sizes has been extensive in the last decade by urologists across the world. Among all, α-blocker tamsulosin has been used widely. In contrast silodosin which is recently introduced in the market and more selective alpha-receptor antagonist and cardioselective drug but it has not been used widely as MET. In this study, silodosin (8 mg), tamsulosin (0.4 mg), and oral hydration therapy were compared in terms of efficacy and safety as MET in the management of ureteric stone along with rate of stone clearance, expulsion time, analgesic requirements, and adverse effects for treating ureteral stones size between ≥4 mm and ≤10 mm in diameter. Materials and Methods: Prospective randomized study was conducted between September 2018 and August 2020 with a total of 240 patients (80 patients in each arm) in tertiary care center of eastern India. First group received a single dose of silodosin (8 mg) daily, second group received a single dose of tamsulosin (0.4 mg) daily and third group received oral hydration therapy for 4 weeks. Results: There is no difference in the stone expulsion rate (SER), stone expulsion time (SET), and surgical intervention between tamsulosin, silodosin and oral hydration therapy group for ureteric stones ≤5 mm size. For ureteric stones of size 6 mm–10 mm, silodosin has better SER than tamsulosin with no difference in terms of SET. Analgesic requirement and pain episodes were more in the oral hydration group with no adverse effects (statistically significant). Conclusion: The proportion of passed-out stone was significantly higher among the patients treated with silodosin (65.0%) in comparison to other two groups (P < 0.05) with no difference in SET.


How to cite this article:
Pal DK, Kumar A, Sarkar D. A comparative study of the efficacy of silodosin versus tamsulosin versus oral hydration therapy in medical expulsion therapy for ureteral calculi.Urol Sci 2022;33:19-25


How to cite this URL:
Pal DK, Kumar A, Sarkar D. A comparative study of the efficacy of silodosin versus tamsulosin versus oral hydration therapy in medical expulsion therapy for ureteral calculi. Urol Sci [serial online] 2022 [cited 2023 Feb 5 ];33:19-25
Available from: https://www.e-urol-sci.com/article.asp?issn=1879-5226;year=2022;volume=33;issue=1;spage=19;epage=25;aulast=Pal;type=0