Comparison Between Tamsulosin and Oxybutynin in Relieving Ureteral Stent Related Symptoms

{"title":"Comparison Between Tamsulosin and Oxybutynin in Relieving Ureteral Stent Related Symptoms","authors":"","doi":"10.33140/mcr.08.11.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One handred cases with unilateral ureteral stent insertion were randomized into four groups; given placebo (25 patients), Oxybutynin 5mg once daily (25 patients), Tamsulosin 0.4mg once daily (25 patients) or combination respectively. All patients received the drugs for three weeks and completed the symptom questionnaire and quality of life questionnaire one week after stent insertion and one week after stent removal. There was no significant difference in the efficacy between Tamsulosin and Oxybutynin in relieving urgency (9 patients, 9 patients respectively), frequency (7 patients, 9 patients respectively) and dysuria (11 patients, 9 patients respectively) with the superiority of combination therapy (12 patients, 16 patients, 17 patients respectively)( P-values: 0.01, 0.001, 0.001 respectively). For relieving abdominal pain, Tamsulosin was more efficacious than Oxybutynin (8 patients versus 5 patients) with the superiority of the combination therapy (12 patients) (P-value: 0.001). For relieving hematuria, Tamsulosin and combination therapy were comparable and both superior to Oxybutynin with a P-value 0.001. For improving quality of life, both Tamsulosin and Oxybutynin were comparable (9 patients, 9 patients) with superiority of combination therapy (15 patients) with a P-value 0.001.","PeriodicalId":503698,"journal":{"name":"Medical & Clinical Research","volume":" 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical & Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33140/mcr.08.11.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

One handred cases with unilateral ureteral stent insertion were randomized into four groups; given placebo (25 patients), Oxybutynin 5mg once daily (25 patients), Tamsulosin 0.4mg once daily (25 patients) or combination respectively. All patients received the drugs for three weeks and completed the symptom questionnaire and quality of life questionnaire one week after stent insertion and one week after stent removal. There was no significant difference in the efficacy between Tamsulosin and Oxybutynin in relieving urgency (9 patients, 9 patients respectively), frequency (7 patients, 9 patients respectively) and dysuria (11 patients, 9 patients respectively) with the superiority of combination therapy (12 patients, 16 patients, 17 patients respectively)( P-values: 0.01, 0.001, 0.001 respectively). For relieving abdominal pain, Tamsulosin was more efficacious than Oxybutynin (8 patients versus 5 patients) with the superiority of the combination therapy (12 patients) (P-value: 0.001). For relieving hematuria, Tamsulosin and combination therapy were comparable and both superior to Oxybutynin with a P-value 0.001. For improving quality of life, both Tamsulosin and Oxybutynin were comparable (9 patients, 9 patients) with superiority of combination therapy (15 patients) with a P-value 0.001.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
坦索罗辛与奥昔布宁在缓解输尿管支架相关症状方面的比较
将 1 名单侧输尿管支架植入患者随机分为四组,分别给予安慰剂(25 名患者)、奥昔布宁 5 毫克,每天一次(25 名患者)、坦索罗辛 0.4 毫克,每天一次(25 名患者)或联合用药。所有患者均接受了为期三周的药物治疗,并在植入支架一周后和移除支架一周后填写了症状问卷和生活质量问卷。坦索罗辛和奥昔布宁在缓解尿急(分别为 9 名患者和 9 名患者)、尿频(分别为 7 名患者和 9 名患者)和排尿困难(分别为 11 名患者和 9 名患者)方面的疗效无明显差异,而联合疗法更优(分别为 12 名患者、16 名患者和 17 名患者)(P 值分别为 0.01、0.001、0.001)。在缓解腹痛方面,坦索罗辛的疗效优于奥昔布宁(8 例患者对 5 例患者),联合疗法的疗效更优(12 例患者)(P 值:0.001)。在缓解血尿方面,坦索罗辛和联合疗法疗效相当,均优于奥昔布宁,P 值为 0.001。在改善生活质量方面,坦索罗辛和奥昔布宁具有可比性(9 例患者、9 例患者),而联合疗法更优(15 例患者),P 值为 0.001。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recurrent Benign Acute Childhood Myositis (BACM) and Incidental Generalised Joint Hypermobility (GJH); A Case Study and Discussion IgA Vasculitis Secondary to Enterococcus Faecalis Cardiac Device Infective Endocarditis; A Case Report, Discussion of the Literature and Protocol for Assessment of Inflammatory Skin Lesions in Emergency Medicine Arizona and COVID-19: Four-Year Experience 2020-23 Tanning Melanotan Jabs and Nasal Spray: Safe or Not? Enzyme Therapy - A Revolution in Medicine?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1