EFFICACY EVALUATION OF THE PHYTOTHERAPEUTIC DRUG CANEPHRON N IN THE COMPLEX TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH UROLITHIASIS USING EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY
The study objective was to analyse the effect of the herbal drug Canephron N, namely, its ability to potentiate the efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of patients with urolithiasis (UL) and prevent recurrence of stone formation.
Aim. To сheck the hypothesis that treatment with Canephron N can potentiate lithotripsy and reduce the risk of re-stone formation.
Methodology. Patients at the age of 18 to 65 years had calcium oxalate urolithiasis with the size of the stone from 0.8 to 1.3 cm in the kidneys and from 0.5 to 0.9 cm. in ureters who underwent ESWL procedure. They were randomized into 2 equal groups of 30 people. The treatment group received general recommendations on the management of the patient with UL following ESWL and the herbal drug Canephron N for 6 months. The control group received only general recommendations. Moreover, according to condition, both groups received painkillers and spasmolytics if pain occurred during elimination of fragments. The following parameters were evaluated: the period of elimination of fragments after stone disintegration by ESWL method; the percentage of complete elimination of fragments; the presence of pain syndrome and leukocyturia in the postoperative period; the rate of recurrence of stone formation during one year after the procedure.
Results. More complete and rapid elimination of fragments was observed in the treatment group. Thus, up to day 14 elimination of stone fragments was observed in 96.6 % of patients in the treatment group versus 76.6 % in the control group. Fewer cases of pain syndrome during elimination of stone fragments (23 % in the treatment group and 43 % in the control group) and rare cases of leukocyturia within 14 days (10 % versus 23 %, respectively) were observed in the treatment group. Recurrent stone formation within the year was not observed in patients of the treatment group, in the control group – in 23 % of patients. However, because of the small size of the groups, one may talk about a tendency but not about statistically significant patterns.
Conclusion. Canephron N is an effective and safe drug in the treatment of patients with urolithiasis who underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Its use contributes to more rapid and safe elimination of fragments of destructed calculi and reduces risk of recurrent stone formation.
Keoghane, S., Walmsley, B., Hodgson, D. (2009). The natural history of untreated renal tract calculi. BJU International, 105 (12), 1627–1629. doi: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2010.09389.x
Aliaev, Iu. H., Amosov, A. V., Hazimiev, M. A. (2010). Ultrasonic methods of functional diagnostics in urological practice. Мoscow:“R. Valent”.
Alyaev, Y., Rudenko, V. (2016). Current aspects of drug treatment of patients with urolithiasis. Efective Pharmacotherapy. Urology and Nephrology, 5 (41), 10–16.
Cherepanova, E., Dzeranov, N. (2014). Metaphilic of urolithiasis in outpatient conditions. Health of Men, 2 (49), 21–25.
Davidov, M. I., Igoshev, A. M. (2015). The effect of the herbal preparation Canefron® H on the results of distance shock-wave lithotripsy. Health Man, 4 (55), 96–100.
Ceban, E. (2012). Efficacy of a fixed combination of Centaurii herba, Levistici radix and Rosmarini folium in urinary lithiasis. Zeitschrift Für Phytotherapie, 33 (1), 19–23. doi: http://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1286040
Tiselius, H-G., Alken, P., Buck, C., Gallucci, M., Knoll, T., Sarica, K., Türk, Chr. (2009). EAU Guedlines on urolithiasis. European Association of Urology, 116.
Kok, D. J. (2015). The preventive treatment of recurrent stone-formation: how can we improve compliance in the treatment of patients with recurrent stone disease? Urolithiasis, 44 (1), 83–90. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-015-0842-9
Alyaev, Y., Rudenko, V. (2012). Herbal preparation Canephron N in the treatment of patients with urolithiasis. Urology, 6, 22–25.
Gaibulaev, A., Kariev, S. (2012). Effect of long-term Canephron N treatment on urinary risk factors associated with idiopathic calcium urolithiasis. Springer Medizin.
Naber, K. (2013). Efficacy and safety of the phytotherapeutic drug Canephron N in prevention and treatment of urogenital and gestational disease: review of clinical experience in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Research and Reports in Urology, 5, 39–46. doi: http://doi.org/10.2147/rru.s39288
Grigoryan, V., Amosov, A. (2011). The use of Canephron H in urolithiasis. RMJ, 16, 1033.
Alelign, T., Petros, B. (2018). Kidney Stone Disease: An Update on Current Concepts. Advances in Urology, 2018, 1–12. doi: http://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3068365
Strohmaier, W. L. (2000). Volkswirtschaftliche Aspekte des Harnsteinleidens und der Harnsteinmetaphylaxe. Der Urologe A, 39 (2), 166–170. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s001200050026
Yeni, E et. al. (2003) 2 EULIS Meeting (The 10-th European Symposium on Urolithiasis). Istanbul, 348.
Trinchieri, A. (2006). Epidemiological trends in urolithiasis: impact on our health care systems. Urological Research, 34 (2), 151–156. doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-005-0029-x
Kumarasamy, Y., Nahar, L., Sarker, S. (2003). Bioactivity of gentiopicroside from the aerial parts of Centaurium erythraea. Fitoterapia, 74 (1-2), 151–154. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/s0367-326x(02)00319-2
Ukhal, M., Gabchak, R. (2010). Use of drug Canephron N in complex with SPA –therapy in patients with urolithiasis. The health of man, 4, 117–121.
Ukhal, M., Malomuzh, O. (2013). Modern possibilities of phytotherapy in the postoperative rehabilitation treatment of patients with urolithiasis complicated by chronic pyelonephritis. Urology, Andrology, Nephrology. Kharkiv, 196–200.
Gracza, L., Koch, H., Löffler, E. (1985). Über biochemisch-pharmakologische Untersuchungen pflanzlicher Arzneistoffe, 1. Mitt. Isolierung von Rosmarinsäure aus Symphytum officinale und ihre anti-inflammatorische Wirksamkeit in einem In-vitro-Modell. Archiv Der Pharmazie, 318 (12), 1090–1095. doi: http://doi.org/10.1002/ardp.19853181207
👁 516 ⬇ 290
Copyright (c) 2018 Ð’Ð»Ð°Ð´Ð¸Ð¼Ð¸Ñ€ Ð¤Ñ€Ð°Ð½ÐºÐ¾Ð²Ð¸Ñ‡ Ð’Ð¸Ñ‚ÐºÐ¾Ð²ÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our journal abides by the Creative Commons CC BY copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.
Authors, who are published in this journal, agree to the following conditions:
1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons CC BY, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.