Efficacy and safety of tamsulosin hydrochloride 0.2 mg and combination of tamsulosin hydrochloride 0.2 mg plus solifenacin succinate 5 mg after transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective, randomized controlled trial
Received 15 June 2016
Accepted for publication 15 July 2016
Published 19 September 2016 Volume 2016:11 Pages 1301—1307
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Richard Walker
Yu Seob Shin,1,* Li Tao Zhang,1,* Jae Hyung You,1 In Sung Choi,1 Chen Zhao,2 Jong Kwan Park1
1Department of Urology, Chonbuk National University and Research Institute of Clinical Medicine of Chonbuk National University-Biomedical Research Institute and Medical Device Clinical Trial Center of Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Republic of Korea; 2Department of Urology, Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, and Shanghai Institute of Andrology, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tamsulosin hydrochloride 0.2 mg (TAM) and its combination with solifenacin succinate 5 mg (SOL) after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).
Patients and methods: The patients were randomized into three groups: TURP (group 1), TURP plus TAM (group 2), and TURP plus TAM + SOL (group 3). Patients in group 2 and group 3 received medication for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy end points were the mean change in total International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and IPSS subscores. The secondary end points included quality-of-life score, Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, and short-form voiding and storage score of International Continence Society.
Results: In total, 37 men (31.8%) in group 1, 37 men (31.8%) in group 2, and 42 men (36.2%) in group 3 completed the study. In total IPSS, no significant improvement was seen from baseline to the end of treatment in groups 2 and 3 compared with group 1. However, in group 2, the decrement in the IPSS storage score was smaller than group 1 (P=0.02), and in group 3, the decrement in the IPSS voiding score was smaller than group 1 (P=0.05). In groups 2 and 3 compared with group 1, improvements in the quality of life score, total score of Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, and short-form voiding score and storage score of International Continence Society were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Treatment with TAM and combination of TAM and SOL did not have significant additional benefits for lower urinary tract symptoms during the early recovery period after TURP.
Keywords: benign prostate hyperplasia, tamsulosin, solifenacin, combination, transurethral resection of the prostate
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]