ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2026
The efficacy and safety of adrenergic alpha-antagonists combined with PDE5 inhibitors in the medical expulsive therapy for unilateral distal ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Distal ureteral stones are a common urological condition, causing significant morbidity. While medical expulsive therapy (MET) using α-adrenergic receptor antagonists (α-ARAs) or phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE5) inhibitors has been widely studied, the efficacy and safety of their combination remain debated. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination therapy compared with α-ARAs alone. Methods: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Chinese databases to identify clinical studies published up to November 02, 2025, involving patients with distal ureteral stones treated with PDE5 inhibitors in combination with α-ARAs.All analyses were performed using the Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4). Results: A total of eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,202 patients were included, with 1,029 patients ultimately enrolled in the meta-analysis. For distal ureteral stones, the stone expulsion rate (SER) was significantly higher in the combination therapy group than in the α-ARA monotherapy group [risk ratio (RR) =1.25, P<0.001]. The mean stone expulsion time was also significantly shorter in the combination group [standardized mean difference (SMD) =-0.73, P<0.001]. In terms of pain episodes, combination therapy showed a trend toward reducing the number of pain attacks and the need for analgesics. However, the pooled analysis for pain episodes was limited by substantial heterogeneity. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of adverse events such as headache, dizziness, or hypotension. However, an association with a higher trend of back pain was observed [odds ratio (OR) =1.64, P=0.02], which lost statistical significance in the sensitivity analysis (P=0.06). Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicates that compared with α-ARAs monotherapy, combination therapy significantly improves the SER, shortens stone expulsion time, and reduces the need for analgesics. The pooled analysis for pain episodes was limited by substantial heterogeneity and must be interpreted with caution. Regarding safety, there were no significant differences between the two groups for most adverse events; however, an association with a higher risk of back pain was observed, a finding that must be interpreted with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.