A critical assessment of the effects of @entity9940 and XXXX as monotherapies and as a combination therapy for the treatment of ureteral stent-related symptoms: a 2  *  2 factorial randomized trial.

@entity1 @entity2180 @entity9940 @entity7634
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of @entity9940 , @entity2180 , and combination therapy of both agents for the treatment of ureteral stent-related symptoms (SRSs). METHODS: An open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 112 @entity1 who underwent unilateral ureteral stent insertion following ureteroscopic stone surgery. @entity1 were randomized with a 2  *  2 factorial design to one of four groups, i.e., A (control), B ( @entity9940 0.2  mg once daily), C ( @entity2180 5  mg once daily), and D (both active treatments). @entity1 were evaluated at week 2 by the ureteral stent symptom questionnaire (USSQ). The primary efficacy outcome was the urinary symptom score of the USSQ, and the secondary efficacy outcomes were the scores in the other five USSQ domains, the @entity7634 -QOL score, and oral analgesic requirements during the 2  weeks. Efficacy outcomes were primarily analyzed for the per-protocol set population. RESULTS: The four groups were generally well balanced in terms of baseline characteristics. Eighty-one @entity1 (72.3  %) completed the study protocol. Comparison of the six USSQ domain scores at week 2 showed no differences between the four groups. Similarly, comparison of the domain scores stratified by @entity9940 or @entity2180 medication showed no differences for either medication. The other secondary outcomes were also similar in the group comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Neither @entity9940 nor @entity2180 medications provide beneficial effects for relieving various SRSs. In addition, the combination therapy did not have beneficial effects. Further studies are warranted to determine the benefit of medical therapy for the treatment of SRSs and to determine the optimal management strategy for SRSs.
