5 research outputs found
Effect of Tamsulosin on Stone Passage for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Study objectiveTamsulosin is recommended for patients receiving a diagnosis of a ureteral stone less than 10 mm who do not require immediate urologic intervention. Because of conflicting results from recent meta-analyses and large randomized controlled trials, the efficacy of tamsulosin is unclear. We perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of tamsulosin on stone passage in patients receiving a diagnosis of ureteral stone.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched without language restriction through November 2015 for studies assessing the efficacy of tamsulosin and using a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial design. Meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model and subgroup analyses were conducted to determine sources of heterogeneity.ResultsEight randomized controlled trials (N=1,384) contained sufficient information for inclusion. The pooled risk of stone passage in the tamsulosin arm was 85% versus 66% in the placebo arm, but substantial heterogeneity existed across trials (I2=80.2%; P<.001). After stratifying of studies by stone size, the meta-analysis of the large stone subgroup (5 to 10 mm; N=514) indicated a benefit of tamsulosin (risk difference=22%; 95% confidence interval 12% to 33%; number needed to treat=5). The meta-analysis of the small stone subgroup (<4 to 5 mm; N=533) indicated no benefit (risk difference=-0.3%; 95% confidence interval -4% to 3%). Neither meta-analysis for the occurrence of dizziness or hypotension showed a significant effect.ConclusionTamsulosin significantly improves stone passage in patients with larger stones, whereas the effect of tamsulosin is diminished in those with smaller stones, who are likely to pass their stone regardless of treatment
Recommended from our members
Correlation of Physical Exam Findings with Fever in Patients with Skin and Soft Tissue Infections
Study Objectives
The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence of fever in adult ED patients with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) and to determine which, if any, physical exam, x-ray and laboratory test findings were associated with fever.
Methods
We conducted a prospective, observational study at an urban county trauma center of adults who presented to the ED for evaluation of suspected SSTI. ED providers measured area of erythema and induration using a tape measure, and completed data sheets indicating comorbid conditions and the presence or absence of physical exam findings. Fever was defined as any recorded temperature > 38°C during the first 6 hours of ED evaluation.
Results
Of the 734 patients enrolled, 96 (13.1%) had fever. Physical and laboratory exam findings associated with the presence of a fever in multivariable logistic regression were the area of erythema, particularly the largest quartile of area of erythema, 144 – 5000 cm2, (odd ratio (OR) = 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.6 – 5.2) and leukocytosis (OR = 4.4, 95% CI = 2.7 – 7.0). Bullae, necrosis, streaks, adenopathy, and bone involvement on imaging were not associated with fever.
Conclusions
Fever is uncommon in patients presenting to the ED for evaluation of suspected SSTI. Area of erythema and leukocytosis were associated with fever and should be considered in future decision rules for the evaluation and treatment of SSTI
Recommended from our members
Effect of Tamsulosin on Stone Passage for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Study objectiveTamsulosin is recommended for patients receiving a diagnosis of a ureteral stone less than 10 mm who do not require immediate urologic intervention. Because of conflicting results from recent meta-analyses and large randomized controlled trials, the efficacy of tamsulosin is unclear. We perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of tamsulosin on stone passage in patients receiving a diagnosis of ureteral stone.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched without language restriction through November 2015 for studies assessing the efficacy of tamsulosin and using a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial design. Meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model and subgroup analyses were conducted to determine sources of heterogeneity.ResultsEight randomized controlled trials (N=1,384) contained sufficient information for inclusion. The pooled risk of stone passage in the tamsulosin arm was 85% versus 66% in the placebo arm, but substantial heterogeneity existed across trials (I2=80.2%; P<.001). After stratifying of studies by stone size, the meta-analysis of the large stone subgroup (5 to 10 mm; N=514) indicated a benefit of tamsulosin (risk difference=22%; 95% confidence interval 12% to 33%; number needed to treat=5). The meta-analysis of the small stone subgroup (<4 to 5 mm; N=533) indicated no benefit (risk difference=-0.3%; 95% confidence interval -4% to 3%). Neither meta-analysis for the occurrence of dizziness or hypotension showed a significant effect.ConclusionTamsulosin significantly improves stone passage in patients with larger stones, whereas the effect of tamsulosin is diminished in those with smaller stones, who are likely to pass their stone regardless of treatment
Recommended from our members
Effect of Tamsulosin on Stone Passage for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Study objectiveTamsulosin is recommended for patients receiving a diagnosis of a ureteral stone less than 10 mm who do not require immediate urologic intervention. Because of conflicting results from recent meta-analyses and large randomized controlled trials, the efficacy of tamsulosin is unclear. We perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of tamsulosin on stone passage in patients receiving a diagnosis of ureteral stone.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched without language restriction through November 2015 for studies assessing the efficacy of tamsulosin and using a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial design. Meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model and subgroup analyses were conducted to determine sources of heterogeneity.ResultsEight randomized controlled trials (N=1,384) contained sufficient information for inclusion. The pooled risk of stone passage in the tamsulosin arm was 85% versus 66% in the placebo arm, but substantial heterogeneity existed across trials (I2=80.2%; P<.001). After stratifying of studies by stone size, the meta-analysis of the large stone subgroup (5 to 10 mm; N=514) indicated a benefit of tamsulosin (risk difference=22%; 95% confidence interval 12% to 33%; number needed to treat=5). The meta-analysis of the small stone subgroup (<4 to 5 mm; N=533) indicated no benefit (risk difference=-0.3%; 95% confidence interval -4% to 3%). Neither meta-analysis for the occurrence of dizziness or hypotension showed a significant effect.ConclusionTamsulosin significantly improves stone passage in patients with larger stones, whereas the effect of tamsulosin is diminished in those with smaller stones, who are likely to pass their stone regardless of treatment