You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 21, Issue 1
  • Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not improve stone passage over placebo nor were they cost-effective in ureteric stone disease

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Therapeutics/Prevention
Randomised controlled trial
Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not improve stone passage over placebo nor were they cost-effective in ureteric stone disease
  1. Sayyid M Ammar Raza,
  2. Philip A Kalra
  1. Department of Renal Medicine, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK
  1. Correspondence to : Philip A Kalra, Department of Renal Medicine, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Stott Lane, Salford M6 8HD, UK; Philip.kalra{at}srft.nhs.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2015-110294

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Commentary on: Pickard R, Starr K, MacLennan G, et al. Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha-blocker (tamsulosin) (the SUSPEND trial). Health Technol Assess 2015;19:1–172.OpenUrl

    Context

    Symptomatic ureteric stones are a common urological problem with an annual incidence of around 30/100 000 population in high-resource countries.1 Usually stones sized <6 mm pass spontaneously and are therefore managed conservatively. Recent European Association of Urology guidelines (August 2015) recommend the use of medical expulsion therapy (MET), in the form of α-blockers, to facilitate small stone passage.2 This guidance is primarily based on the findings of a meta-analysis in 2009 which assessed 47 clinical trials.3 Two classes of MET were assessed, calcium …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Correction notice This article has been corrected since it was published Online First. The order of the first and second authors has been transposed.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.