Main Article Content

Abstract

Herbal medicines offer vast scope for the successful treatment of urolithiasis. Although most remedies were herbal and proved useful, a systematic scientific evaluation has been reported for only few remedies. Tecoma stans a herbal formulation was claimed to be useful in the treatment of urinary stones. Toxicity study confirms that the therapeutic dose of Tecoma stans was 430 mg/kg. The antilithiatic effect of Tecoma stans was determined on lactose diet + ethylene glycol induced and ammonium chloride + ethylene glycol induced lithiasis in male albino wistar rats. The results obtained after 4 weeks of treatment for the urine estimation of calcium, oxalate, magnesium and protein were significant (p<0.01) in reducing the calculus when compared with the standard drug cystone (750 mg/kg) treated animals. Urine calcium oxalate crystals were also reduced in test drug treated and standard treated groups. These observations and results conclude that Tecoma stans herbal formulation possesses significant antiurolithiatic activity.

Keywords

Tecoma stans Antiurolithiatic activity herbal medicines

Article Details

How to Cite
Anil kumar reddy.P, Ch Rajendra Prasad, Srividya Jahnavi, & N.Sriram. (2021). ANTIUROLITHIATIC ACTIVITY OF ACTIVITY OF TECOMA STANS LEAF EXTRACT. International Journal of Research in Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics, 4(1), 77-82. https://doi.org/10.61096/ijrpp.v4.iss1.2015.77-82

References

  1. American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma: Advanced Trauma Life Support for Doctors ATLS. 8th edition. Chicago, IL; American College of Surgeons; 2012.
  2. [2] Hutchison I, Lawlor M, Skinner D: ABC of major trauma. Major maxillofacial injuries. BMJ 1990, 301:595-599.
  3. [3] Crosby ET: Airway management in adults after cervical spine trauma. Anesthesiology 2006, 104:1293-1318.
  4. [4] Manoach S, Paladino L: Manual in-line stabilization for acute airway management of suspected cervical spine injury: historical review and current questions. Ann Emerg Med 2007, 50:236-245.
  5. [5] Santoni BG, Hindman BJ, Puttlitz CM, Weeks JB, Johnson N, Maktabi MA, Todd MM: Manual in-line stabilization increases pressures applied by the laryngoscope blade during direct laryngoscopy and orotracheal intubation. Anesthesiology 2009, 110:24-31.
  6. [6] Ellis DY, Harris T, Zideman D: Cricoid pressure in emergency department rapid sequence tracheal intubations: a risk-benefit analysis. Ann Emerg Med 2007, 50:653-665.
  7. [7] Levitan RM, Kinkle WC, Levin WJ, Everett WW: Laryngeal view during laryngoscopy: a randomized trial comparing cricoid pressure, backward-upward-rightward pressure, and bimanual laryngoscopy.
  8. [8] Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway; An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway; Anesthesiology 2013; 118;
  9. [9] Benumof and Hagberg’s airway management ;3rd edition; Caren A.Hagberg, Elseiver health sciences; soft copy, pg no 412,2012;
  10. [10] Peterson GN, Domino KB, Caplan RA, Posner KL, Lee LA, Cheney FW: Management of the difficult airway: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 2005, 103:33-39.
  11. [11] Carin A. Hagberg, M.D. ASA Difficult Airway Management Guidelines: What's New? Volume 77, Number 9; September 1, 2013
  12. [12] Mohiuddin A, Shabir A, Khan RA, Durrani Z. Submental intubation in extensive maxillofacial trauma. Anaesth Pain & Intensive Care;15(3):182-184. Mar 2013
  13. [13] Geeta Mittal, Rajinder K. Mittal, Sunil Katyal, Sanjeev Uppal, and Varun Mittal; Airway Management in Maxillofacial Trauma: Do We Really Need Tracheostomy/Submental Intubation. J Clin Diagn Res. Mar 2014; 8(3): 77–79.
  14. [14] Chetan B. Raval and Mohd. Rashiduddin Airway management in patients with maxillofacial trauma – A retrospective study of 177 cases; Saudi J Anaesth. 2011 Jan-Mar; 5(1): 9–14.