Table 3.
Overview of study results
| Author | Year | α –blocker participant (% of total participants) | Patients on a-blocker at baseline (% of total participants) | Patients given alpha blocker peri-procedurally (% of total participants) | Non α– blocker participants (% of total participants) | α -blocker AUR Rate (number) | Non α – blocker AUR Rate (number) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muthuveloe et al | 2016 | 59/200 (29.5%) | Not applicable | 59/200 (29.5%) | 141/200 (60.5%) | 5.30% (4) | 12.50% (21) |
| Kum et al | 2019 | 238/243 (97.9%) | 56/243 (23.0%) | 238/243 (97.9%) were given an alpha blocker on day of procedure (did not specify who the 5 participants were who did not receive therapy), and if not on alpha blocker at baseline were given a 5–7 day course post-operatively | 5/243 (2.0%) | 12.80% (5) | 0% (0) |
| Ekwueme et al | 2013 | 43/270 (16.0%) | 43/270 (16.0%) | Not applicable | 227/270 (84.0%) | 9.30% (4) | 4.40% (10) |
| Namekawa et al | 2015 | 566/1663 (33.4%) | 566/1663 (33.4%) | Not applicable | 1097/1663 (66.6%) | 19.61% (111) | 12.22% (134) |
One study demonstrated a reduction in AUR following prophylactic alpha blockers whilst three studies demonstrated a harm effect. Kum et al. did not have a case of urinary retention in their non-alpha blocker participants