Efficacy and safety of @entity9940 vs. XXXX as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones.

@entity1 @entity31503 @entity9940 @entity158
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of @entity9940 and @entity31503 as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones. @entity1 AND METHODS: In all, 112 @entity1 with ureteric stones of    10  mm, located along the ureter, were randomly divided into three groups. In group I, 32 @entity1 received no a-blockers (controls), in group II 40 @entity1 received @entity9940 0.4  mg daily, and in group III 40 @entity1 received @entity31503 10  mg daily. All @entity1 were given analgesia and antibiotics when indicated. The follow-up was weekly for 4  weeks. RESULTS: The mean stone size and age were comparable in the three groups. The stone expulsion rate was 44%, 85% and 75% in groups I, II and III, respectively. Half of the stones in group II passed within 2  weeks, half in group III passed within 3  weeks, while more than half of the stones in group I did not pass even after 4  weeks. The mean number of @entity158 episodes was 2.45, 1.38 and 1.64 in groups I, II and III, respectively. The drug-related side-effects reported by @entity1 were mild and transient. CONCLUSION: The use of @entity9940 or @entity31503 as medical expulsive therapy for ureteric stones in the three sections of the ureter (upper, middle and lower) was safe and effective, as shown by the increased overall stone expulsion rate, reduced stone expulsion time and fewer @entity158 episodes. @entity9940 was associated with a greater rate of stone expulsion than was @entity31503 .
