MISCELLANEOUS

Comparison of Alpha-Blockers and Antimuscarinics in Improving Ureteral Stent-Related Symptoms: A 
Meta-Analysis

Yiyang Gao1,3,#,Hengrui Liang1,2,3,#, Luhao Liu1,4, Alberto Gurioli5, Wenqi Wu1*

Purpose: A meta-analysiswas conducted to compare alpha-blocker (AB) and antimuscarinic (AM) monotherapies 
in releasing US-related symptoms.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed on online databases PubMed, Web of Science, Med-
line, and Cochrane library. Ureteric Symptom Score Questionnaire (USSQ), International Prostate Symptom Score 
(IPSS), quality of life (QoL) and visual analogue pain scale (VAPS) were pooled and compared. 

Results: Nine full-text articles met the inclusion criteria and have been included. The studies were conducted in 9 
different centers between 2009 and 2016. All articles were RCT studies and a total of 654 patients were recorded 
totally, among which 323 were given alpha-blockers while others were given antimuscarinics. Although patients 
using alpha-blockers presented lower USSQ scores, no statistically significant difference was recorded in urinary 
symptom(SMD 0.5, 95 % CI -0.2 to 1.20, P = 0.159), pain(SMD 0.33, 95 % CI -0.26 to 0.92, P = 0.280),general 
health, work performance(SMD-0.34, 95 % CI -0.08 to 0.76, P = 0.115)  and sexual performance  (all p > 0.05)
(SMD 0.12, 95 % CI -0.10 to 0.34, P = 0.280). Meanwhile IPSS (SMD -0.10, 95 % CI -0.32 to 0.11, P = 0.358), 
QoL(SMD-0.03, 95 % CI -0.23 to 0.18, P = 0.802)  and VAPS(SMD 0.08, 95 % CI -0.15 to 0.31, P = 0.447) were 
similar between the two groups (all P > 0.05).

Conclusion: The analysis suggests that AB showed a similar effect with AM. It is necessary to conduct a larger 
and more detailed cohort study and find the population that potentially might benefit most by AM. 

Keywords: alpha-Blockers; antimuscarinics; ureteral stent-related symptoms; meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Indwelling ureteral stent (US) is common during en-dourological practice since 1967[1]. However,it has 
been reported that 38% to 80% patients ever experi-
enced stent related symptoms(2,3), which may be caused 
by the spasm of ureteric smooth musculature around the 
indwelling foreign object. Alpha-blockers (AB) effica-
cy is already proven in releasing stent-related morbidi-
ty(4, 5). The potential mechanism may include the reduc-
tion of bladder irritation symptoms due to involuntary 
bladder contraction. Meanwhile, antimuscarinics (AM) 
have been used to overcome symptoms caused by the 
involuntary overactive contraction of the bladder due 
to the distal end of the stent in the urinary bladder, with 
encouraging results(6).A randomized clinical trial has 
proved that preoperative administration of oral toltero-

1 Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guang-
dong Key Laboratory of Urology, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
2 Nanshan School, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 511436, 
China
3 The First Clinical Academy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Medical University, Guang-
zhou 511436, China
4 Department of organ transplantation, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 511436, China
5 Department of Urology, Turin University of Studies, Italy
#These authors equally contributed to the paper 
*Correspondence: Department of Urology, Minimally InvasiveSurgery center, the first affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou medical Uni-
versity, Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology. Kangda Road 1#, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, China, 510230. 
Telephone: 86-020-34294145. Email: wwqwml@163.com.
Received September 2017 & Accepted April 2018

dine could reduce catheter related bladder discomfort 
after percutaneous  nephrolithotomy(7).
Several cohort studies and meta-analysis have demon-
strated the superiority of either AB or AM to placebo 
on alleviating US-related symptoms(8,9,10). However, 
there are still limited studies to compare the therapeutic 
effect on US-related symptom between AB and AM. 
To address this issue, we gathered the available pro-
spective randomized controlled studies and conducted a 
meta-analysisto investigate if a statistically significant 
difference exist between AB and AM monotherapies in 
releasing US-related symptoms. 

METHODS
Literature search and selection 
A systematic and comprehensive literature search of on-

Miscellaneus    307



Vol 16 No 03   May-June 2019   308  

line databases PubMed (National Library of Medicine, 
Bethesda, MD, US), Web of Science (Thompson Sci-
entific, Philadelphia, PA, US), Embase, and Cochrane 
library was performed to identify randomized con-
trolled trials(RCTs) before February 28th,2017. Search 
strategy was as following:(alpha-blocker OR α-blocker 
OR tamsulosin) AND (antimuscarinic OR tolterodine 
OR solifenacin) AND (ureteral stent-related symptoms 
OR ureteric stent-related discomfort OR SRS).Mean-
while,references and related articles of clinical studies 
and reviews were also manually checked. Language 
was limited to English. The therapeutic effects of AB 
and AM on patients with US-related symptoms were 
examined. 
We evaluated all search results according to the PRIS-
MA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Re-
views and Meta-Analyses) statement(11). The selection 
of original studies was based on the process of viewing 
titles, abstracts and full papers. The inclusion criteria 
were as following:(1) studies focused on patients with 
US insertion;(2) comparative studies examining effect of 
AB versus AM;(3) RCTs studies;(4) comparative studies 
that reported at least one outcome of interest. Non-com-
parative studies, review articles, abstracts, case reports, 
editorials, expert opinions, commentary articles, and 
letters were excluded. 
Data extraction and quality assessment 
Data were extracted independently by two investigators 
(Y.Y. Gao and H.R. Liang) and conflicts were adjudi-
cated by a third investigator (W.Q. Wu). Information 
about all available variables from selected studies was 
extracted. Ureteric Symptom Score Questionnaire 
(USSQ)(12)including urinary symptom, pain, general 
health, work performance and sexual performance, In-
ternational Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of 

life (QoL)[13] and visual analogue pain scale (VAPS) 
were used to evaluate the outcomes. Quality assessment 
was assessed using the JADAD scoring(14).
Statistical analysis
Standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI 
was calculated for outcomes. Cochran’s X2 test and I2 
were used to examine the heterogeneity among effect 
estimates. Statistical heterogeneity among studies was 
defined as I2 statistic greater than 50%. Fixed effects 
model was preferred to random effects model when 
there was no statistically significant heterogeneity and 
vice versa when there was significant heterogeneity(15). 
Study bias was detected using the methods of Funnel 
plots and the egger and Begger’s test(16). Statistical sig-
nificance was taken as two-sided P <  0.05. The analy-
sis was conducted with STATA 12.0 (Stata Corporation 
College Station, TX, USA)

RESULTS
Study selection and quality assessment 
Initially 146 records were screened and 38 additional 
relevant studies were identified after a hand searching 
inspection. 153 papers remained after excluding dupli-
cates. After an in-depth review, 9 full-text articles met 
the inclusion criteria and were considered in the analy-
sis(6,17-24) (Figure 1).
All of the articles were RCT studies with a total of 654 
patients. 323 patients were treated with AB monother-
apy while 331 were treated with AM monotherapy. All 
studies gained 6 or 7 score in study quality assessment 
(Table 1).
Ureteric Symptom Score Questionnaire (USSQ)
USSQ was presented for evaluating the US-related 
symptoms including frequency, urgency, pain, dysuria, 

Comprison of ABs and AMs in improving USSs-Yiyang Gao et.al.

Table 1. Characteristics of the included studies in the meta-analysis.

Year Design Treatment  Outcomes  Duration Total N α-blocker N Antimuscarinic N Stent size  Jadad score

2016 RCT Tamsulosin 0.4mg QD  
  Oxybutynin 5mg QD USSQ,QoL  day 7 34 17 17  24/26cm;6F  3
2016 RCT Tamsulosin 0.4mg QD 
  Solifenacin 5mg QD USSQ  day 14 87 44 43  24/26cm;6F  3
2016 RCT Tamsulosin 0.4mg QD 
  Solifenacin 5mg QD USSQ  day 21 117 59 58  24/26/28cm;4.7/6/7F 5
2015 RCT Tamsulosin 0.2mg QD 
  Solifenacin 5mg QD USSQ  day 14 40 20 20  20/22/24/26/28cm;6F 3
2013 RCT Terazosin 2mg Bid   
  Tolterodine 2mg QD IPSS,VAPS,QoL NG 46 23 23  28cm;4.8F  5
2013 RCT Tamsulosin 0.4mg QD 
  Solifenacin 10mg QD IPSS,VAPS,QoL day 14 160 80 80  NG   5
2012 RCT Doksazosin 4 mgQD 
  Tolterodine 4 mg QD IPSS,QoL  NG 42 21 21  26/28cm;4.7F 5
2011 RCT Tamsulosin 0.2mg QD 
  Solifenacin 5mg QD IPSS,VAPS,QoL day 14 88 43 45  24/26cm;6F  3
2009 RCT Alfuzosin 10mg QD 
  Tolterodine 4mg QD USSQ  day 42 40 20 20  24-28cm;6F  5

Table2. SummarySWD of Ureteric Symptom Score Questionnaire of Alpha-blockers versus antimuscarinic.

Outcomes  Study number Heterogeneity I2(%) Statistical Method Summary SWD(%)(95%CI)

Urinary symptom  5  88.2  random   0.50 [ -0.2,1.20], P = 0.159
Pain   5  83.9  random   0.33 [-0.26,0.92], P = 0.280
General health  5  68.9  random   0.34 [-0.08,0.76], P = 0.115
Work performance  5  54.9  random   0.29 [-0.05,0.64], P = 0.098
Sexual performance  5  20.8  random   0.12 [-0.10,0.34], P = 0.280



incomplete emptying and hematuria. Random effects 
model was used in the five groups. Although lower 
USSQ score was noticed in patients using AB com-
pared with AM group in all items, urinary symptom 
(SMD 0.5, 95 % CI -0.2 to 1.20, P = 0.159), pain (SMD 
0.33, 95 % CI -0.26 to 0.92, P = 0.280), general health 
(SMD-0.34, 95 % CI -0.08 to 0.76, P = 0.115), work 
performance (SMD 0.29, 95 % CI -0.05 to 0.64, P = 
0.098) and sexual performance (SMD 0.12, 95 % CI 
-0.10 to 0.34, P = 0.280) there is no significant differ-
ence (Table 2). 
International prostate symptom score (IPSS)
The IPSS was lower in patients treated with AB mono-
therapy than in patients treated with AM monotherapy 
in fixed model, but no significantly (SMD -0.10, 95 % 
CI -0.32 to 0.11, P = 0.358), with low heterogeneity (I2 
= 9.8%, p = 0.344) (Figure 2).
Quality of life (QoL)
6 studies including 370 cases reported QoL. Fixed mod-
el was used. No significant difference was found be-
tween AB and AM monotherapies (SMD-0.03, 95 % CI 
-0.23 to 0.18, P = 0.802), with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0, 
p = 0.425) (Figure 3). 
Visual Analog Pain Score (VAPS)
The present meta-analysis in fixed model indicated that 
the VAPS was similar between AB or AM (SMD 0.08, 
95 % CI -0.15 to 0.31, P = 0.447), with low heterogene-

ity (I2 = 21.8, p = 0.279) (Figure 4). 
Publication bias and sensitivity analysis
Visual inspection of funnel plots suggested there was no 
obviously asymmetric distribution of main outcomes. 
Begger and Egger’s test confirmed there was no signif-
icant publication bias (Table 3). A sensitivity analysis 
was performed by excluding the studies with the low-
est-quality score. This did not influence the results.

DISCUSSION 
To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis aimed 
to evaluate the efficacy of AB and AM monotherapies 
in relieving US-related symptoms. We did not observed 
statistically significant superiority of AB in overcoming 
stent-related symptoms compared to AM. The analysis 
suggests that both drugs can effectively treat US-related 
symptoms.
Despite a growing number of studies on US-related 
symptoms, explicit pathophysiology is still matter of 
debate. Lang et al.(25) proposed that US-related pain and 
urinary symptoms may be the result of ureteric spasm 
or trigonal irritation. Pain and lower urinary tract symp-
toms (LUTS) caused by stent could be worsened by the 
increasing pressure transmitted to the renal pelvis dur-
ing urination, bladder ischemia and lower ureteric and 
bladder spasm(26,27). A US may also exacerbate pre-ex-

Comprison of ABs and AMs in improving USSs-Yiyang Gao et.al.

Outcomes  Number of estimates  P value for Begg's test  P value for Egger's test

General health  5   0.806   0.908
Urinary symptom  5   0.462   0.572
Pain score  5   0.806   0.907
Work performance  5   1   0.927
Sexual performance  5   0.462   0.457
IPSS   4   0.308   0.592
QoL   5   0.806   0.588
VAPS   3   0.296   0.297

Table 3.Assessment for publication bias.

 Figure 1. flow diagram detailing the search strategy and identification of 
studies used in Meta-analysis

 Figure 2. . Forest plot of International prostate symptom score (IPSS) of 
Alpha-blockers versus antimuscarinic

Miscellaneus    309



Vol 16 No 03   May-June 2019   310  

isting subclinical detrusor over-activity and induce 
overactive bladder symptoms(28). 
AB are the first-line treatment for LUTS, while AM 
are widely used for the treatment of overactive blad-
der. Both drugs have been applied to treat US-related 
symptoms in clinical practice. AB could reduce the 
US-induced pain during voiding probably determining 
a relaxation of bladder neck/prostatic smooth muscu-
lature and consequently reducing voiding pressure and 
urinary reflux(29). Flank pain may be the result of ureter 
spasm in patients with indwelling US, AB may relieve 
it by decreasing ureteral spasm and vescico-ureteral re-
flux(30). 
Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire(USSQ), Inter-
national Prostate Symptom Score (IPPS), Visual Ana-
logue Pain Score (VAPS) and Quality of Life (QoL) 
are measuring tools used in the included studies about 
ureteral stent-related symptoms. USSQ was designed 
to characterize urinary symptoms associated with stent 

including frequency, urgency, pain, dysuria, incomplete 
emptying and hematuria. IPSS was used as frequently 
as USSQ for assessing stent-related symptoms, which 
was divided into the total score, obstructive symptom 
score, and irritative symptom score. Analogue Pain 
Scale graded from 1 (minimal or no symptoms) to 10 
(symptoms of maximal severity). 
In endourological clinical practice, AB are much more 
commonly used than AM to release US-related symp-
toms. However, our results suggest that AM were not 
significantly inferior in improving US-related symp-
toms if compared to AB. Thus, AM can be a valid alter-
native to AB in this category of patients.
This study has some limitations. First, many clinical 
factors and any underlying ureteral disease would have 
influenced the outcomes, and different patient char-
acteristics also may have a negative influence on the 
overall results. Second, different types of intra-corpo-
real lithotripsy and dose difference of medications to 
patients were not sub-analyzed in our study because of 
data limitation. Third, since majority of included studies 
reported an insufficient follow-up period, consequently, 
we were unable to evaluate the outcomes varying from 
time.

CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the analysis suggests that AB showed 
a similar effect with AM. Although lower USSQ and 
IPSS score were noticed in patients using AB compared 
with AM group in all items, but without statistically 
significant difference, and equally no significant differ-
ence were found between AB and AM monotherapies 
in the way of QoL and VAPS. It is necessary to conduct 
a larger and more detailed cohort study and find the 
population that potentially might benefit most by AM.  

REFERENCES
 1. Zimskind PD, Fetter TR, Wilkerson JL. 

Clinical use of long-term indwelling 
silicone rubber ureteral splints inserted 
cystoscopically.J Urol. 1967;97:840-844. 

 2. Nabi G, Cook J, N'Dow J, et al. Outcomes of 
stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: 
systematic review and meta-analysis.
BMJ.2007;334:572. 

 3. Byrne RR, Auge BK, Kourambas J, et al. 
Routine ureteral stenting is not necessary 
after ureteroscopy and ureteropyeloscopy: a 
randomized trial. J Endourol. 2002;16:9-13.

 4. Beddingfield R, Pedro RN, Hinck B, et al. 
Alfuzosin to relieve ureteral stent discomfort: 
a prospective, randomized, placebo controlled 
study.J Urol. 2009;181:170-176.

 5. Damiano R, Autorino R, De Sio M, et al. 
Effect of tamsulosin in preventing ureteral 
stent-related morbidity: a prospective study. J 
Endourol. 2008;22:651-656.

 6. Kuyumcuoglu U, Eryildirim B, Tuncer M, 
et al. Effectiveness of medical treatment in 
overcoming the ureteral double-J stent related 
symptoms. Can Urol Assoc.2012;6:E234-7.

 7.     Maghsoudi R -, Farhadi-Niaki S, Etemadian 
M,et al.Comparing the efficacy of tolterodine 

Comprison of ABs and AMs in improving USSs-Yiyang Gao et.al.

Figure 3. Forest plot of Quality of life (QoL) of Alpha-blockers versus 
antimuscarinic

Figure 4. Forest plot of Visual Analog Pain Score (VAPS) of Alpha-
blockers versus antimuscarinic



and gabapentin versus placebo in catheter 
related bladder discomfort after percutaneous 
nephrolithotomy: A randomized clinical 
trial.J Endourol.2017 Dec 26. doi: 10.1089/
end.2017.0563. [Epub ahead of print].

 8. Zhou L, Cai X, Li H, et al. Effects of alpha-
Blockers, Antimuscarinics, or Combination 
Therapy in Relieving Ureteral Stent-Related 
Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis.J Endourol. 
2015;29:650-656. 

 9. Yakoubi R, Lemdani M, Monga M, et al. Is 
there a role for alpha-blockers in ureteral stent 
related symptoms? A systematic review and 
meta-analysis.J Urol. 2011;186:928-934. 

 10.  Norris RD, Sur RL, Springhart WP, et al. A 
prospective, randomized, double-blinded 
placebo-controlled comparison of extended 
release oxybutynin versus phenazopyridine 
for the management of postoperative ureteral 
stent discomfort. Urology. 2008;71:792-795. 

 11.  Knobloch K, Yoon U, Vogt PM. Preferred 
reporting items for systematic reviews and 
meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement and 
publication bias. J Cranio Maxill Surg. 
2011;39:91-92.

 12.    Joshi HB, Newns N, Stainthorpe A, et al. Ureteral 
stent symptom questionnaire: development 
and validation of a multidimensional quality 
of life measure. J Urol.2003;169:1060-1064.

 13.    Joshi HB, Stainthorpe A, Keeley FX Jr, et 
al.Indwelling ureteral stents: Evaluation of 
quality of life to aid outcome analysis. J 
Endourol.2001;15:151-154.

 14.  Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. 
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized 
clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control 
Clin Trials. 1996;17:1-12.

 15. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. 
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. 
BMJ. 2003;327:557-560.

 16. Seagroatt V, Stratton I. Bias in meta-analysis 
detected by a simple, graphical test. Test had 
10% false positive rate. BMJ. 1998;316:470; 
author reply 470-1. 

 17. Park SC, Jung SW, Lee JW, et al. The effects 
of tolterodine extended release and alfuzosin 
for the treatment of double-j stent-related 
symptoms. J Endourol. 2009;23:1913-1917.

 18. Lim KT, Kim YT, Lee TY, et al. Effects of 
tamsulosin, solifenacin, and combination 
therapy for the treatment of ureteral 
stent related discomforts. Korean J Urol. 
2011;52:485-488.

 19. Shalaby E, Ahmed AF, Maarouf A, et al. 
Randomized controlled trial to compare the 
safety and efficacy of tamsulosin, solifenacin, 
and combination of both in treatment of 
double-j stent-related lower urinary symptoms. 
Adv Urol. 2013;2013:752382.

 20. Tehranchi A, Rezaei Y, Khalkhali H, et al. 
Effects of terazosin and tolterodine on ureteral 

stent related symptoms: a double-blind 
placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial. 
Int Braz JUrol. 2013;39:832-840. 

 21. Park J, Yoo C, Han DH, et al. A critical 
assessment of the effects of tamsulosin 
and solifenacin as monotherapies and as a 
combination therapy for the treatment of 
ureteral stent-related symptoms: a 2 x 2 
factorial randomized trial. World J Urol. 
2015;33:1833-1840. 

 22. Abdelaal AM, Al-Adl AM, Abdelbaki SA, 
et al. Efficacy and safety of tamsulosin oral-
controlled absorption system, solifenacin, 
and combined therapy for the management of 
ureteric stent-related symptoms. Arab J Urol. 
2016;14:115-122. 

 23. El-Nahas AR, Tharwat M, Elsaadany M, et 
al. A randomized controlled trial comparing 
alpha blocker (tamsulosin) and anticholinergic 
(solifenacin) in treatment of ureteral stent-
related symptoms. World J Urol. 2016;34:963-
968. 

 24. Maldonado-Avila M, Garduno-Arteaga L, 
Jungfermann-Guzman R, et al. Efficacy 
of Tamsulosin, Oxybutynin, and their 
combination in the control of double-j stent-
related lower urinary tract symptoms. Int Braz 
JUrol.2016;42:487-493.

 25. Lang RJ, Davidson ME, Exintaris B. 
Pyeloureteral motility and ureteral peristalsis: 
essential role of sensory nerves and 
endogenous prostaglandins.Exp Physiol. 
2002;87:129-146.

 26. Siggers JH, Waters S, Wattis J, et al. Flow 
dynamics in a stented ureter. Math Med Biol. 
2009;26:1-24.

 27. Camoes J, Coelho A, Castro-Diaz D, et al. 
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms and Aging: 
The Impact of Chronic Bladder Ischemia 
on Overactive Bladder Syndrome. Urol Int. 
2015;95:373-379. 

 28. Joshi HB, Okeke A, Newns N, et al. 
Characterization of urinary symptoms 
in patients with ureteral stents. Urology. 
2002;59:511-516. 

 29. Wang CJ, Huang SW, Chang CH. Effects 
of specific alpha-1A/1D blocker on lower 
urinary tract symptoms due to double-J stent: 
a prospectively randomized study. Urol Res. 
2009;37:147-152. 

 30. Davenport K, Timoney AG, Keeley FX, Jr. 
Effect of smooth muscle relaxant drugs on 
proximal human ureteric activity in vivo: a 
pilot study. Urol Res. 2007;35:207-213.

 

Comprison of ABs and AMs in improving USSs-Yiyang Gao et.al.

Miscellaneus    311