Bitkisel bir ajan “Tutukon®”un üreter taşlarının spontan pasaj oranlarına etkisi

Year 2023, Volume: 18 Issue: 2, 108 - 114, 27.06.2023

Rasim Güzel , Laurian Dragos , Ümit Yıldırım , Bilal Eryıldırım , Kemal Sarıca

https://doi.org/10.33719/yud.2023;18-2-1187893

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, bir bitkisel ajan olan Tutukon®’ un 5-10 mm üreter taşlarının spontan geçiş oranları üzerindeki etkinliğini değerlendirmektir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: 5-10 mm çapında, tek radyoopak üreter taşı olan 96 hasta randomize olarak iki gruba ayrıldı. Grup 1'e (n=51) konservatif yaklaşıma ek olarak 45 mg/gün (üç kez) Tutukon®, Grup 2'deki hastalar (n=45) ise 4 haftalık takip süresince klasik konservatif yaklaşımla takip edildi. Taş geçiş oranları, taş çıkarma süreleri, haftalık kolik ataklarındaki değişim ve kolik ağrısı nedeniyle hastaneye yeniden başvuru oranları karşılaştırıldı.
Sonuçlar: Taş çıkarma oranları iki grup arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık gösterdi (%66.7'ye karşı %46.7, p = 0.048). Ek olarak, Tutukon® alan vakalarda, sadece konservatif önlemler alan Grup 2 hastaları ile karşılaştırıldığında, taşların spontan geçişi için gereken ortalama süre anlamlı olarak kısaydı (sırasıyla 5,79 ± 2,39 ve 8,82 ± 3,48 gün) (p = 0,001). Benzer şekilde, takip süresi boyunca ortalama renal kolik atakları Grup 1 hastalarında önemli ölçüde azaldı (sırasıyla %66,6'ya karşı %36, p = 0,001). Son olarak Grup 1'de kolik ağrı ataklarının daha az olduğu görüldü ve “Tutukon®”un bir diğer avantajı da taşların üreterin daha distal kısmına yer değiştirmesiydi (%35.2'ye karşı %4).
Sonuç: Üreter taşlarının medikal tedavisinde Tutukon® kullanımı, taşların spontan düşüş oranlarını hızlandırabilir ve aynı zamanda üreterin daha alt seviyelerine geçişini hızlandırabilir.

Keywords

bitkisel ajanlar , medikal terapi , spontan pasaj , üreter taşları

The effect of an herbal agent “Tutukon®” on the spontaneous passage rates of ureteric stones

Abstract

Objective:: The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of an herbal agent (Tutukon®) on the spontaneous passage rates of ureteral calculi 5-10 mm.
Materials and Methods: 96 patients having a single radio-opaque ureteral stone 5-10 mm were randomized into two groups. Group 1 (n = 51) received Tutukon®, 45 mg/day (three times) in addition to conservative approach and Group 2 patients (n = 45) were followed with classical conservative approach during 4 weeks follow-up. The stone passage rates, stone expulsion time, change in weekly colic episodes and hospital readmission rates for colicky pain were compared.
Results: Stone expulsion rates showed statistically significant difference between the two group (66.7 % vs 46.7 %, p = 0.048). Additionally mean time period required for the spontaneous passage of the calculi was meaningfully short in those cases receiving Tutukon® when compared with Group 2 patients undergoing conservative measures only (5.79 ± 2.39 vs 8.82 ± 3.48 days, respectively) (p = 0.001). Similarly, the mean renal colic episodes during follow-up period were significantly diminished in Group 1 patients (66.6 vs 36%, p = 0.001, respectively). Lastly, colic pain attacks were noted to be less in Group 1 and another advantage of“Tutukon®” was the relocation of the stones to a more distal part of ureter (35.2 vs 4 %).
Conclusion: Use of Tutukon® in the medical management of ureteral calculi can accelarate the spontaneous passage rates and also relocate them into the lower portion of the ureter.

Keywords

herbal agents , medical therapy , spontaneous passage , ureteral stones

References

• 1. Scales CD, Smith AC, Hanley JM, et al. Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol 2012;62(1):160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2012.03.052
• 2. Hubner WA, Irby P, Stoller ML. Natural history and current concepts for the treatment of small ureteral calculi. Eur Urol 1993;24(2):172–176. https://doi.org/10.1159/000474289
• 3. Bierkens AF, Hendrikx AJM, de La Rosette JJMCH, et al. Treatment of mid- and lower ureteric calculi: extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy vs laser ureteroscopy. A comparison of costs, morbidity and effectiveness. Br J Urol 1998;81(1):31–35. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1464-410X.1998.00510.X
• 4. Dellabella M, Milanese G, Muzzonigro G. Randomized trial of the efficacy of tamsulosin, nifedipine and phloroglucinol in medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteral calculi. J Urol 2005;174(1):167–172. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000161600.54732.86
• 5. Pradère B, Doizi S, Proietti S, et al. Evaluation of Guidelines for Surgical Management of Urolithiasis. J Urol 2018;199(5):1267–1271. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JURO.2017.11.111
• 6. Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, et al. EAU Guidelines on Diagnosis and Conservative Management of Urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2016;69(3):468–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2015.07.040
• 7. Nakada SY, Coyle TLC, Ankem MK, et al. Doxazosin relaxes ureteral smooth muscle and inhibits epinephrine-induced ureteral contractility in vitro. Urology 2007;70(4):817–821. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UROLOGY.2007.06.002
• 8. Sahin C, Sarikaya S, Basak K, et al. Limitation of apoptotic changes and crystal deposition by Tutukon following hyperoxaluria-induced tubular cell injury in rat model. Urolithiasis 2015;43(4):313–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00240-015-0777-1
• 9. Meiouet F, el Kabbaj S, Daudon M. [In vitro study of the litholytic effects of herbal extracts on cystine urinary calculi]. Prog Urol 2011;21(1):40–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PUROL.2010.05.009
• 10. Naber KG. 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. Res Rep Urol 2013;5(1):39–46. https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S39288
• 11. Rad AK, Hadjzadeh M-A-R, Rajaei Z, et al. The beneficial effect of Cynodon dactylon fractions on ethylene glycol-induced kidney calculi in rats. journals.sbmu.ac.ir 2011;8(3):179–84
• 12. Jensen MP, Karoly P, Braver S. The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain 1986;27(1):117–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(86)90228-9
• 13. Segura JW, Preminger GM, Assimos DG, et al. Ureteral Stones Clinical Guidelines Panel summary report on the management of ureteral calculi. The American Urological Association. J Urol 1997;158(5):1915–1921. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64173-9
• 14. Al-Ansari A, Al-Naimi A, Alobaidy A, et al. Efficacy of tamsulosin in the management of lower ureteral stones: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study of 100 patients. Urology 2010;75(1):4–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UROLOGY.2009.09.073
• 15. Johnson DB, Pearle MS. Complications of ureteroscopy. Urologic Clinics of North America 2004;31(1):157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-0143(03)00089-2
• 16. Borghi L, Meschi T, Amato F, et al. Nifedipine and methylprednisolone in facilitating ureteral stone passage: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Urol 1994;152(4):1095–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)32511-9
• 17. Patle A, Hatware KV, Patil K, et al. Role of Herbal Medicine in the Management of Urolithiasis- A Review for Future Perspectives. J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol 2019;38(2):97–118. https://doi.org/10.1615/JENVIRONPATHOLTOXICOLONCOL.2019029075
• 18. Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, et al. Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART II. J Urol 2016;196(4):1161–1169. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JURO.2016.05.091
• 19. Dellabella M, Milanese G, Muzzonigro G. Efficacy of tamsulosin in the medical management of juxtavesical ureteral stones. J Urol 2003;170(6 Pt 1):2202–2205. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000096050.22281.A7
• 20. Autorino R, de Sio M, Damiano R, et al. The use of tamsulosin in the medical treatment of ureteral calculi: where do we stand? Urol Res 2005;33(6):460–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00240-005-0508-0
• 21. Ye Z, Zeng G, Yang H, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Tamsulosin in Medical Expulsive Therapy for Distal Ureteral Stones with Renal Colic: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial. Eur Urol 2018;73(3):385–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2017.10.033
• 22. Resim S, Ekerbicer H, Ciftci A. Effect of tamsulosin on the number and intensity of ureteral colic in patients with lower ureteral calculus. Int J Urol 2005;12(7):615–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1442-2042.2005.01116.X
• 23. Monti E, Trinchieri A, Magri V, et al. Herbal medicines for urinary stone treatment. A systematic review. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2016;88(1):38. https://doi.org/10.4081/AIUA.2016.1.38
• 24. Yuruk E, Tuken M, Sahin C, et al. The protective effects of an herbal agent tutukon on ethylene glycol and zinc disk induced urolithiasis model in a rat model. Urolithiasis 2016;44(6):501–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00240-016-0889-2
• 25. Tuken M, Temiz MZ, Yuruk E, et al. The role of an herbal agent in treatment for Escherichia coli induced bacterial cyctitis in rats. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2017;89(2):134–138. https://doi.org/10.4081/AIUA.2017.2.134