| Title |
Tamsulosin for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Impotence Research, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ijir.2017.12 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
H L Zhang, Z G Huang, Y Qiu, X Cheng, X Q Zou, T T Liu |
| Abstract |
Tamsulosin has been used for the off-label treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in women. Over the past few years, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported the clinical effectiveness and safety of tamsulosin for LUTS in women. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tamsulosin in treating LUTS in women, which may resolve some of the current controversies over use of the drug and provide more reliable evidence for the use of tamsulosin. A literature review was performed to identify all published RCTs of tamsulosin for the treatment of LUTS in women. The search included the following databases: PUBMED, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trail Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Science and Technique Journals Database (VIP) and Wanfang Database. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Six RCTs studies involving 764 female participants were included in the analysis. Four out of the six RCTs compared tamsulosin with placebo, one RCT compared tamsulosin with prazosin and the other study compared tamsulosin with tamsulosin combined with tolterodine. Two RCTs evaluated total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and improved total IPSS compared with the placebo (standardized mean difference=-4.08, 95% confidence interval=-5.93 to -2.23, P<0.00001). IPSS (storage symptom score), IPSS (voiding symptom score) and quality-of-life score also showed the similar effects. In addition, tamsulosin improved the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire score when compared with placebo in only one RCT. For urodynamic parameters, tamsulosin improved the average flow rate and the post-void residual volume when compared with prazosin and tolterodine combined with tamsulosin, respectively. Beyond that, the other parameters showed no significant difference between the treatment and control groups. On the basis of the present evidence, tamsulosin is an effective treatment for the relief of LUTS in women when compared with placebo. However, the safety of the tamsulosin remains unknown. Further, well-conducted trials that examine long-term outcomes are required.International Journal of Impotence Research advance online publication, 20 April 2017; doi:10.1038/ijir.2017.12. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Brazil | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 24% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Professor | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 33% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 7 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2023.
All research outputs
#3,056,597
of 23,878,717 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Impotence Research
#255
of 1,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,930
of 312,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Impotence Research
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,878,717 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.