Open AccessEffect of Herbal Formulation “Cystone®” on Urolithiasis
Author(s) -
Anoush Azarfar,
Zahra Rafiee,
Yalda Ravanshad,
Niloufar Saber Moghadam,
Elham Bakhtiari
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
jundishapur journal of natural pharmaceutical products
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.228
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 2228-7876
pISSN - 1735-7780
DOI - 10.5812/jjnpp.69246
Subject(s) - jadad scale , medicine , placebo , context (archaeology) , randomized controlled trial , urinary system , uric acid , urine , adverse effect , cochrane library , urology , alternative medicine , paleontology , pathology , biology
Context: The study aimed to systematically review the clinical data on the efficacy of Cystone® as an herbal treatment for urolithiasis. Methods: Full text randomized clinical trials comparing Cystone® with placebo or citrate in patients with urolithiasis for urinary stone prevention or treatment were evaluated. Three databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, were searched from January 2000 to December 2017. The main outcomes were the reductions in calculi number/size and urinary excretion rate of calcium, oxalate, and urate. The secondary outcome was the adverse effects of Cystone®. Documents were screened by two reviewers for eligibility. The Jadad score was used for quality assessment. The data were analyzed using the comprehensive meta-analysis version 2.2.064 software. Results: Of 532 relevant studies, five were finally included. Cystone® was effective in the decrement of stone size in comparison with placebo (95% CI: 0.63, 9.13). There was a significant difference in the excretion rate of uric acid but not calcium compared to the placebo. Cystone® had no significant side effects. Conclusions: Cystone® is more effective than a placebo in the treatment of urinary tract stones. It significantly induces stone size decrement and clearance compared to placebo. The low quality of reports is a major limitation in the applicability of these results.