Mirabegron versus Solifenacin in Children with Overactive Bladder: Prospective Randomized Single-Blind Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of mirabegron versus solifenacin in the treatment of newly diagnosed overactive bladder (OAB) in children. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study on pediatric patients with newly diagnosed OAB. Patients were randomized into 3 groups: mirabegron (50 mg once daily) in group I, solifenacin (5 mg) in group II, and placebo in group III. Before starting our treatment and at the end of the 3 months course, we obtained a 3-day voiding diary. This diary included incontinence episode per day, mean voided volume per micturition, mean number of micturition per day, and post-void residual urine. Moreover, the parents/patients were asked to rate symptom relief, and the adverse events were recorded throughout the study period. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients aged from 5 to 14 years completed this study. At the end of this trial, both groups I and II showed significant improvement versus placebo regarding our efficacy parameters with no significant difference between group I and II. The overall success rate based on assessment of symptom relief was significantly higher in the treated groups (87.5% in I and 90.2% in II) versus placebo (55.8%). Dry mouth was reported in 2.8, 10, and 0% and constipation in 2.8, 11.4, and 1.4% in group I, II, and III, respectively, without statistically significant difference between group I and placebo. However, there was a significant difference between group II and placebo regarding these side effects. CONCLUSION: Both mirabegron and solifenacin have comparable efficacy regarding the control of OAB symptoms in the newly diagnosed children, but mirabegrone seems to have less side effects.

Silodosin versus Tamsulosin as Medical Expulsive Therapy for Children with Lower-Third Ureteric Stones: Prospective Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of silodosin versus tamsulosin as medical expulsive therapy for stones of lower-third ureter in children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective single-blind placebo-controlled randomized study included 167 pediatric patients who presented with distal ureteric stone (DUS) less than 1 cm. Patients were randomized into 3 groups; group I received silodosin 4 mg once daily, and group II received tamsulosin 0.4 mg while those in group III had placebo. The side effects of the used drugs, both rate and time of stone expulsion, and number of pain episodes were compared among the study groups for a maximum of 4 weeks. RESULTS: Follow-up data of our patients after treatment revealed that the stone expulsion rate was significantly higher and the time to stone expulsion was significantly shorter in group I (89.3%, 12.4 ± 2.3 days) and group II (74.5%, 16.2 ± 4.2 days) compared to group III (51.8%, 21.2 ± 5.6). However, a statistically significant difference between silodosin and tamsulosin groups in favor of the former one was reported regarding the 2 studied items. Meanwhile, pain episodes requiring analgesia were statistically fewer in group I and II in contrast to placebo group. Adverse events were comparable among all groups. CONCLUSION: Silodosin provides significantly better stone expulsion rate and shorter expulsion time than tamsulosin for treatment of DUS. Both medications showed good safety profiles in children. However, further studies are required on a larger scale to confirm our results. Assessment of drug safety on younger age-group is still needed.

Outcome of Modification of Dose and Time of Administration of Tamsulosin in Men with Abnormal Ejaculation.

INTRODUCTION: Alpha-adrenergic blockers are now the cornerstone medication in management of lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS); however, the associated treatment-related abnormal ejaculation could be a bothersome event. This is a comparative study among different methods of tamsulosin administration in terms of efficacy, recoverability of ejaculatory function, and quality of life (QoL) in men with tamsulosin-related abnormal ejaculation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sexually active men receiving tamsulosin for LUTS who were bothered by treatment-related abnormal ejaculation following initiation of tamsulosin were randomized into 3 groups; group A received intermittent-full-standard-dose, group B received low-dose-tamsulosin, and group C received full-standard-dose tamsulosin The status of ejaculatory function, IPSS, QoL score, and Q-Max were measured at baseline and 3 months later. RESULTS: A total of 93 men with mean age of 53.1 years were included in the study, 3-months after randomization, statistically significant improvements in IPSS, QoL index, and Q-Max in comparison to pre-treatment levels were noted. Restoration of normal ejaculation was reported by 74.1 and 90.3% of patients in group A and B, respectively, versus none in group C. The QoL score was significant when comparing group A to the other groups; finally, the Q-Max was significant when comparing group C to the other groups. CONCLUSION: For patients bothered by tamsulosin-related abnormal ejaculation, a significant improvement in the QoL, without deviation from the therapeutic purpose of treatment, can be achieved by administration of 0.4 mg tamsulosin every other day.