Department of Urology, AZ Klina, Brasschaat, Belgium.
UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Eur Urol. 2019 Nov;76(5):658-666. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.07.053. Epub 2019 Aug 15.
Medical expulsive therapy (MET) for ureteral stones has become a controversial area due to the contradictory results of high-quality trials and meta-analyses.
We aimed to review the literature to evaluate the value of and future directions for MET for ureteral stone disease.
A literature search of the MEDLINE database and the Cochrane Library was conducted to collect articles about MET for ureteral calculi published up to 28 October 2018. A total of 524 articles were screened. Sixty-nine publications that met the inclusion criteria for this review were chosen. Among the primary research articles on MET with stone clearance as the primary outcome, seven responded to high-quality requirements of Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomised trials.
The vast majority of randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials without a high or an unclear risk of bias did not find a benefit of MET for increased ureteral stone passage rates. This is in contrast to results of meta-analyses that are skewed by low-quality trials.
The strength of evidence for the benefit of MET in ureteral stones is low, even for distal ureteral stones >5 mm. In the absence of further high-quality data, individual clinicians are required to decide for themselves whether to believe high-quality single trials or meta-analyses.
We evaluated the value of and future directions for medical expulsive therapy (MET) for ureteral stone disease. We found that outcomes varied between studies. Individual clinicians are required to decide for themselves which studies to believe. Alpha-blockers as MET may retain a role in a selective group of well-counselled patients with larger stones who understand the side effects and off-label use.
由于高质量试验和荟萃分析的结果相互矛盾,医学排石疗法(MET)在输尿管结石中的应用已成为一个有争议的领域。
我们旨在回顾文献,评估 MET 治疗输尿管结石疾病的价值和未来方向。
对 MEDLINE 数据库和 Cochrane 图书馆进行文献检索,收集截至 2018 年 10 月 28 日发表的关于 MET 治疗输尿管结石的文章。共筛选出 524 篇文章。选择符合本综述纳入标准的 69 篇 MET 相关出版物,其中主要研究为以结石清除率为主要结局的 MET。在以 MET 为主要结局的随机对照试验中,有 7 篇符合 Cochrane 协作组评估偏倚风险工具的高质量要求。
绝大多数无高偏倚或不明确偏倚的随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验均未发现 MET 可提高输尿管结石排出率。这与受低质量试验影响的荟萃分析结果形成对比。
即使对于>5mm 的远端输尿管结石,MET 获益的证据强度也较低。在缺乏进一步高质量数据的情况下,临床医生需要自行决定是相信高质量的单中心试验还是荟萃分析。
我们评估了 MET 治疗输尿管结石疾病的价值和未来方向。我们发现研究结果存在差异。临床医生需要自行决定相信哪些研究。α受体阻滞剂作为 MET 在少数经过精心选择的、有较大结石且理解副作用和超说明书使用的患者中可能仍然有一定作用。