Qing-Lai Tang1, Du-Jian Wang1, Shuang Zhou1, Rong-Zhen Tao2. 1. Nanjing Jiangning Hospital, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China. 2. Nanjing Jiangning Hospital, The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital with Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China. 18915973028@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To observe the efficacy and safety of Mirabegron in patients with distal, ureteral stones ≤ 10 mm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 90 patients with distal ureteral stones ≤ 10 mm were prospectively randomized into two groups. Forty-five cases in the study group and 45 cases as control. The stone-free rates (SFRs) and renal colic episodes between two groups were compared at the 1st, 2nd and 4th week end by imaging examinations. RESULT: All of 90 patients were randomly assigned to two groups. In patients with ≤ 5 mm stones, the SFRs in the 1st week (63.6% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.040), the 2nd week (86.4% vs. 54.2%, P = 0.018), and the 4th week (90.9% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.046) after treatment were all significantly higher than that in the control group by the stratification analysis of stone size. Even though SFRs were all higher for patients with > 5 mm stones in study group, there was no statistically significant difference (All P > 0.05). In terms of renal colic episodes, the frequency of occurrence of the study group was significantly lower than that of the control group and need less antalgic. CONCLUSIONS: The MET with Mirabegron has a significant role in improve SFR for the patients with distal ureteral stones ≤ 5 mm and no effect in > 5 mm stones. Furthermore, Mirabegron reduces the need for antalgic in ≤ 10 mm stones with low incidence of adverse effects.
OBJECTIVE: To observe the efficacy and safety of Mirabegron in patients with distal, ureteral stones ≤ 10 mm. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 90 patients with distal ureteral stones ≤ 10 mm were prospectively randomized into two groups. Forty-five cases in the study group and 45 cases as control. The stone-free rates (SFRs) and renal colic episodes between two groups were compared at the 1st, 2nd and 4th week end by imaging examinations. RESULT: All of 90 patients were randomly assigned to two groups. In patients with ≤ 5 mm stones, the SFRs in the 1st week (63.6% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.040), the 2nd week (86.4% vs. 54.2%, P = 0.018), and the 4th week (90.9% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.046) after treatment were all significantly higher than that in the control group by the stratification analysis of stone size. Even though SFRs were all higher for patients with > 5 mm stones in study group, there was no statistically significant difference (All P > 0.05). In terms of renal colic episodes, the frequency of occurrence of the study group was significantly lower than that of the control group and need less antalgic. CONCLUSIONS: The MET with Mirabegron has a significant role in improve SFR for the patients with distal ureteral stones ≤ 5 mm and no effect in > 5 mm stones. Furthermore, Mirabegron reduces the need for antalgic in ≤ 10 mm stones with low incidence of adverse effects.