Home|Journals|Articles by Year|Audio Abstracts
 

Original Research

RMJ. 2023; 48(2): 429-431


Efficacy of silodosin vs tamsulosin in medical expulsion of distal ureteral stones

Zakir Hussain Rajpar, Kashifuddin Qayoum Soomro, Imran Memon, Shoukat Ali Mughal, Afhan Qayoom Shiekh, Aijaz Shaikh.




Abstract

Objective: To compare the efficacy of new pharmaceutical agent Silodosin with traditionally used agent tamsulosin”.
Methodology: From June 2020 to March 2021, a total of 120 adult patients were recruited for study. Patient’s age >18 years with confirmed distal ureteral stone were randomized for medical expulsion therapy into Group A= 60 (silodosin 8mg) and Group B=60 (tamsulosin 0.4mg). All patients received treatment for 3 weeks. They were asked to observe the stone passage in urine during treatment and follow-up with ultrasound and X ray KUB at the end of 3rd week. The primary end objective was stone expulsion. The data analysis was performed on SPSS 23.
Results: Mean age in Group A was 42.20+8.0 years and in Group B was 43.67+9.6 Years. Overall female gender was predominant (n=66 [55%]). In Group A, 34 (56.6%) patients and in Group B, 40 (66.6%) patients had right ureteral stone. The stone expulsion rate was not significantly different between two groups (p>0.05).
Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference in stone clearance between silodosin and tamsulosin groups. Both drugs can be used for the treatment of distal ureteral stones.

Key words: Ureteral calculi, expulsive therapy, tamsulosin, Silodosin.






Full-text options


Share this Article


Online Article Submission
• ejmanager.com




ejPort - eJManager.com
Refer & Earn
JournalList
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.