Alpha-blockers after shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones in adults

Development and Evaluation of a Framework for Identifying and Addressing Spin for Harms in Systematic Reviews of Interventions

"Spin" refers to misleading reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of findings in primary and secondary research (such as in systematic reviews). The study of spin primarily focuses on beneficial outcomes. The objectives of this research were threefold: first, to develop a framework for identifying spin associated with harms in systematic reviews of interventions; second, to apply the framework to a set of reviews, thereby pinpointing instances where spin may be present; and finally, to revise the spin examples, offering guidance on how spin can be rectified.

The authors developed their framework through an iterative process that engaged an international group of researchers specializing in spin and reporting bias. The framework comprises 12 specific types of spin for harms, grouped by 7 categories across the 3 domains (reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation). The authors subsequently gathered instances of spin from a random sample of 100 systematic reviews of interventions. Of the 58 reviews that assessed harm and the 42 that did not, they found that 28 (48%) and 6 (14%), respectively, had at least 1 of the 12 types of spin for harms. Inappropriate extrapolation of the results and conclusions for harms to populations, interventions, outcomes, or settings not assessed in a review was the most common category of spin in 17 of 100 reviews.

The authors revised the examples to remove spin, taking into consideration the context (for example, medical discipline, source population), findings for harms, and methodological limitations of the original reviews. They provide guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors in recognizing and rectifying or (preferably) avoiding spin, ultimately enhancing the clarity and accuracy of harms reporting in systematic review publications.

A Comparison of Boron Supplement and Tamsulosin as Medical Expulsive Therapy for Urinary Stones After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Treatment with alpha-blockers has been used in many studies to facilitate stone clearance after extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), based on mediating ureteral wall relaxation. Ureteral wall edema is another barrier against the stone passage. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of boron supplement (due to its anti-inflammatory effect) and tamsulosin in the passage of stone fragments after ESWL. Eligible patients after ESWL were randomly assigned to two groups and were treated with boron supplement (10 mg/BD) or tamsulosin (0.4 mg per night) for 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the stone expulsion rate according to the remained fragmented stone burden. The secondary outcomes were the time of stone clearance, pain intensity, drug side effects, and the need for auxiliary procedures. In this randomized control trial, 200 eligible patients were treated with boron supplement or tamsulosin. Finally, 89 and 81 patients in the two groups completed the study, respectively. The expulsion rate was 46.6% in the boron and 38.7% in the tamsulosin group, which there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.003), as well as the time of stone clearance (7.47 ± 22.4 vs 6.52 ± 18.45, days, p = 0.648, respectively), after 2-week follow-up. Moreover, pain intensity was the same in both groups. No Significant side effects were reported in the two groups. Boron supplement could be effective as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy after ESWL with no significant side effects in short-term follow-up. Iranian Clinical Trial Registration number and date of registration: IRCT20191026045244N3, 07/29/2020.

Outcomes of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy following shockwave lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To determine stone-free rate following shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) with/without alpha-blockers as well as complication rates (individual and classified using the Clavien-Dindo system).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials that included more than 20 patients (age > 18 years) and examined the use of alpha-blockers after SWL. Meta-analysis was performed using 'metafor' in R. We report risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The PROSPERO ID for the trial was: CRD42021248108.

RESULTS

We assessed 158 full-text articles and included a total of 21 studies in our review. There were 1445 patients receiving alpha-blockers and 1478 control patients. Those receiving alpha-blockers were significantly more likely to be stone-free (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07-1.16; P < 0.001). This effect was robust to 'trim-and-fill' adjustment. In those taking alpha-blockers there was a significant reduction in Clavien III-V complications and, on trim-and-fill adjustment, a significant reduction in Clavien I-II complications. There were also significant reduction in rates of steinstrasse, pain and requirement for auxiliary procedures. There was no significant difference in retreatment rates. These effects were robust to trim-and-fill adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a modest increase in stone-free rates in those receiving alpha-blockers following SWL, with a reciprocal modest risk reduction for steinstrasse, pain and auxiliary procedures. However, alpha-blockers do not reduce the risk of requiring retreatment.

[Intelligent early prostate cancer detection in 2021: more benefit than harm]

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is used for early detection of prostate cancer which represents the most frequent cancer diagnosed in men in Germany and Europe. Results of the largest screening trials revealed that PSA testing reduces the incidence of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer and shows an effect on cancer-specific mortality. However, since early diagnosis also results in overdiagnosis and overtreatment of insignificant cancers with associated morbidities, there is a need for a more individualized and risk-tailored modern strategy. The PSA at baseline is an important part of this strategy although the German Federal Joint Committee declined its financial coverage by health insurances. Available validated instruments should accompany the baseline PSA to optimize detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Transdermal iontophoresis delivery system for terazosin hydrochloride: an in vitro and in vivo study

This study aimed to construct a transdermal iontophoresis delivery system for terazosin hydrochloride (IDDS-TEH), which included a positive and negative electrode hydrogel prescription. Intact guinea pig skin was used as a model for the skin barrier function, and the current intensity, terazosin hydrochloride (TEH) concentration, pH, competitive salt, and transdermal enhancer properties were studied. The blood drug concentration was determined in Sprague–Dawley (SD) rats using HPLC, and the antihypertensive effects of IDDS-TEH were evaluated in spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHRs). The results showed that the steady-state penetration rate of TEH increased (from 80.36 µg·cm⁻²·h⁻¹ to 304.93 µg·cm⁻²·h⁻¹), followed by an increase in the current intensity (from 0.10 mA·cm⁻² to 0.49 mA·cm⁻²). The pH values also had a significant influence on percutaneous penetration. The blood concentration of IDDS-TEH was significantly higher (p < .05) than with passive diffusion, which could not be detected. The main pharmacokinetic parameters of the high current group (0.17 mA·cm⁻²) and the low current group (0.09 mA·cm⁻²) were AUC_0–t: 5873.0 ng·mL⁻¹·h and 2493.7 ng·mL⁻¹·h, respectively. Meanwhile, the pharmacodynamic results showed that IDDS-TEH significantly decreased the blood pressure of SHRs compared with the TEH hydrogel without loading current. Therefore, TEH could be successfully delivered by the transdermal iontophoresis system in vitro and in vivo, and further clinical studies should be explored to develop a therapeutically useful protocol.

Alpha-blockers after shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones in adults

BACKGROUND

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is a widely used method to treat renal and ureteral stone. It fragments stones into smaller pieces that are then able to pass spontaneously down the ureter and into the bladder. Alpha-blockers may assist in promoting the passage of stone fragments, but their effectiveness remains uncertain.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of alpha-blockers as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy plus usual care compared to placebo and usual care or usual care alone in adults undergoing shock wave lithotripsy for renal or ureteral stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, Embase, several clinical trial registries and grey literature for published and unpublished studies irrespective of language. The date of the most recent search was 27 February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials of adults undergoing SWL. Participants in the intervention group had to have received an alpha-blocker as adjuvant medical expulsive therapy plus usual care. For the comparator group, we considered studies in which participants received placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion/exclusion, and performed data abstraction and risk of bias assessment. We conducted meta-analysis for the identified dichotomous and continuous outcomes using RevManWeb according to Cochrane methods using a random-effects model. We judged the certainty of evidence on a per outcome basis using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 40 studies with 4793 participants randomized to usual care and an alpha-blocker versus usual care alone. Only four studies were placebo controlled. The mean age of participants was 28.6 to 56.8 years and the mean stone size prior to SWL was 7.1 mm to 13.2 mm. The most widely used alpha-blocker was tamsulosin; others were silodosin, doxazosin, terazosin and alfuzosin.  Alpha-blockers may improve clearance of stone fragments after SWL (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 1.23; I² = 78%; studies = 36; participants = 4084; low certainty evidence). Based on the stone clearance rate of 69.3% observed in the control arm, an alpha-blocker may increase stone clearance to 80.4%. This corresponds to 111 more (62 more to 159 more) participants per 1000 clearing their stone fragments. Alpha-blockers may reduce the need for auxiliary treatments after SWL (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00; I² = 16%; studies = 12; participants = 1251; low certainty evidence), but also includes the possibility of no effect. Based on a rate of auxiliary treatments in the usual care arm of 9.7%, alpha-blockers may reduce the rate to 6.5%. This corresponds 32 fewer (53 fewer to 0 fewer) participants per 1000 undergoing auxiliary treatments. Alpha-blockers may reduce major adverse events (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.80; I² = 0%; studies = 7; participants = 747; low certainty evidence). Major adverse events occurred in 25.8% of participants in the usual care group; alpha-blockers would reduce this to 15.5%. This corresponds to 103 fewer (139 fewer to 52 fewer) major adverse events per 1000 with alpha-blocker treatment. None of the reported major adverse events appeared drug-related; most were emergency room visits or rehospitalizations. Alpha-blockers may reduce stone clearance time in days (mean difference (MD) -3.74, 95% CI -5.25 to -2.23; I² = 86%; studies = 14; participants = 1790; low certainty evidence). We found no evidence for the outcome of quality of life. For those outcomes for which we were able to perform subgroup analyses, we found no evidence of interaction with stone location, stone size or type of alpha-blocker. We were unable to conduct an analysis by lithotripter type. The results were also largely unchanged when the analyses were limited to placebo controlled studies and those in which participants explicitly only received a single SWL session.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low certainty evidence, adjuvant alpha-blocker therapy following SWL in addition to usual care may result in improved stone clearance, less need for auxiliary treatments, fewer major adverse events and a reduced stone clearance time compared to usual care alone. We did not find evidence for quality of life. The low certainty of evidence means that our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect.