-
Food and Chemical Toxicology : An... Dec 2015Mad honey, produced by honeybees from the nectars of Rhododendron genus (R. ponticum and R. luteum) flowers, is widely used in indigenous medicine, especially in the... (Review)
Review
Mad honey, produced by honeybees from the nectars of Rhododendron genus (R. ponticum and R. luteum) flowers, is widely used in indigenous medicine, especially in the treatment of hypertension and sexual dysfunction. However, the consumption of this honey can result in intoxication soon after. The diagnosis of honey poisoning and a full understanding of its treatment is important for both effective and immediate treatment, and also for the prevention of unnecessary costs. Upon the evaluation of approximately 34 years of case reports between 1981 and 2014, it was found that the cases of poisoning were more frequently reported in males (75.17%) and between the ages 41 to 65. The most common complaints related to honey poisoning were dizziness, nausea, presyncope and the ECG findings were: sinus bradycardia (79.58%), complete atrioventricular block (45.83%), atrioventricular block (30.91%), ST-segment elevation (22.63%), and nodal rhythm (11.27%), As a result of the evaluation of 1199 cases, it was found that no deaths were reported. The patients were most frequently treated with 0.5 mg atropine (37.79%), 1 mg atropine (49.73%), salin (iv fluid) (65.35%), and generally the patients were discharged within 24 h after recovery.
Topics: Atropine; Dizziness; Food Contamination; Heart Diseases; Honey; Humans; Rhododendron
PubMed: 26547022
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2015.10.018 -
Clinical Toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.) Dec 2017Intraosseous (IO) access is an established route of administration in resuscitation situations. Patients with serious poisoning presenting to the emergency department... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Intraosseous (IO) access is an established route of administration in resuscitation situations. Patients with serious poisoning presenting to the emergency department may require urgent antidote therapy. However, intravenous (IV) access is not always readily available.
OBJECTIVE
This study reviews the current evidence for IO administration of antidotes that could be used in poisoning. The primary outcome was mortality as a surrogate of efficacy. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic variables, electrocardiographic variables, neurological status, pharmacokinetics outcomes, and adverse effects as defined by each article.
METHODS
A medical librarian created a systematic search strategy for Medline, subsequently translated to Embase, BIOSIS, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), and the CENTRAL clinical trial register, all of which we searched from inception to 30 June 2016. Interventions included IO administration of selected antidotes. Articles included volunteer studies, poisoning, or other resuscitation contexts such as cardiac arrest, burns, dehydration, seizure, hemorrhagic shock, or undifferentiated shock. We considered all human studies and animal experiments to the exception of in vitro studies. Two reviewers independently selected studies, and a third adjudicated in case of disagreement. Three reviewers extracted all relevant data. Three reviewers evaluated the risk of bias and quality of the articles using specific scales according to each type of study design.
RESULTS
A total of 47 publications (46 articles and one abstract) met our inclusion criteria and described IO administration of 13 different antidotes. These included one case series and 21 case reports describing 26 patients, and 25 animal experiments. Of those, seven human case reports and four animal experiments specifically reported the use of antidotes in poisoning. Human case reports suggested favorable outcomes with IO use of atropine, diazepam, hydroxocobalamin, insulin, lipid emulsion, methylene blue, phentolamine, prothrombin complex concentrate, and sodium bicarbonate. Clinical outcomes varied according to the antidote used. The only reported adverse event was ventricular tachycardia following IO naloxone. Regarding the animal experiments, IO administration of lipid emulsion and of hydroxocobalamin showed improved survival in bupivacaine-poisoned rats and in cyanide-intoxicated swine, respectively. Animal data also suggested an equivalent bio-availability between IO and IV administration for atropine, calcium chloride, dextrose 50%, diazepam, methylene blue, pralidoxime, and sodium bicarbonate. Adverse effect reporting of fat emboli after IO administration of sodium bicarbonate, for example, was conflicting due to the significant heterogeneity in the timing of lung examination across studies.
CONCLUSION
The evidence supporting the use of IO route for the administration of antidotes in a context of poisoning is scarce. The majority of the evidence consists of case reports and animal experiments. Common antidotes such as acetylcysteine, fomepizole, and digoxin-specific antibody fragments have not been studied or reported with the use of the IO route. Despite the low-quality evidence available, IO access is a potential option for antidotal treatments in toxicological resuscitation when IV access is unavailable.
Topics: Animals; Antidotes; Humans; Infusions, Intraosseous; Poisoning; Resuscitation
PubMed: 28644688
DOI: 10.1080/15563650.2017.1337122 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Nov 2022To provide contemporary and future estimates of childhood myopia prevalence in Africa. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To provide contemporary and future estimates of childhood myopia prevalence in Africa.
METHODS
A systematic online literature search was conducted for articles on childhood (≤18 years) myopia (spherical equivalent [SE] ≤ -0.50D; high myopia: SE ≤ -6.00D) in Africa. Population- or school-based cross-sectional studies published from 1 Jan 2000 to 30 May 2021 were included. Meta-analysis using Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation was performed to estimate the prevalence of childhood myopia and high myopia. Myopia prevalence from subgroup analyses for age groups and settings were used as baseline for generating a prediction model using linear regression.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies from 19 (of 54) African countries were included in the meta-analysis (N = 737,859). Overall prevalence of childhood myopia and high myopia were 4.7% (95% CI: 3.3%-6.5%) and 0.6% (95% CI: 0.2%-1.1%), respectively. Estimated prevalence across the African regions was highest in the North (6.8% [95% CI: 4.0%-10.2%]), followed by Southern (6.3% [95% CI: 3.9%-9.1%]), East (4.7% [95% CI: 3.1%-6.7%]) and West (3.5% [95% CI: 1.9%-6.3%]) Africa. Prevalence from 2011 to 2021 was approximately double that from 2000 to 2010 for all studies combined, and between 1.5 and 2.5 times higher for ages 5-11 and 12-18 years, for boys and girls and for urban and rural settings, separately. Childhood myopia prevalence is projected to increase in urban settings and older children to 11.1% and 10.8% by 2030, 14.4% and 14.1% by 2040 and 17.7% and 17.4% by 2050, respectively; marginally higher than projected in the overall population (16.4% by 2050).
CONCLUSIONS
Childhood myopia prevalence has approximately doubled since 2010, with a further threefold increase predicted by 2050. Given this trajectory and the specific public health challenges in Africa, it is imperative to implement basic myopia prevention programmes, enhance spectacle coverage and ophthalmic services and generate more data to understand the changing myopia epidemiology to mitigate the expanding risk of the African population.
Topics: Adolescent; Africa; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Myopia; Prevalence; Rural Population
PubMed: 35959749
DOI: 10.1111/opo.13035 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atropine for slowing myopia progression and to investigate whether the treatment effect remains constant with continuing...
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atropine for slowing myopia progression and to investigate whether the treatment effect remains constant with continuing treatment. Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from their inception to May 2021, and the language was limited to English. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies involving atropine in at least one intervention and placebo/non-atropine treatment in another as the control were included and subgroup analysis based on low dose (0.01%), moderate dose (0.01%-<0.5%), and high dose (0.5-1.0%) were conducted. The Cochrane Collaboration and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate the quality of RCTs and cohort studies, respectively. Twelve RCTs and fifteen cohort studies involving 5,069 children aged 5 to 15 years were included. The weighted mean differences in myopia progression between the atropine and control groups were 0.73 diopters (D), 0.67 D, and 0.35 D per year for high-dose, moderate-dose, and low-dose atropine, respectively (χ = 13.76; = 0.001, = 85.5%). After removing studies that provided extreme findings, atropine demonstrated a significant dose-dependent effect on both refractive change and axial elongation, with higher dosages of atropine resulting in less myopia progression ( = 0.85; = 0.004) and less axial elongation ( = -0.94; = 0.005). Low-dose atropine showed less myopia progression (-0.23 D; = 0.005) and less axial elongation (0.09 mm, < 0.001) in the second year than in the first year, whereas in high-dose atropine more axial elongation (-0.15 mm, = 0.003) was observed. The higher dose of atropine was associated with a higher incidence of adverse effects, such as photophobia with an odds ratio (OR) of 163.57, compared with an OR of 6.04 for low-dose atropine and 8.63 for moderate-dose atropine ( = 0.03). Both the efficacy and adverse effects of atropine are dose-dependent in slowing myopia progression in children. The efficacy of high-dose atropine was reduced after the first year of treatment, whereas low-dose atropine had better efficacy in a longer follow-up period.
PubMed: 35096861
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.756398 -
Paediatrics & Child Health May 2022Sialorrhea in children can be associated with adverse physical and social effects. Treatment using anticholinergic medications has been shown to offer symptomatic...
BACKGROUND
Sialorrhea in children can be associated with adverse physical and social effects. Treatment using anticholinergic medications has been shown to offer symptomatic relief, but there is no consensus regarding which treatment is the most efficacious.
OBJECTIVE
To examine the effectiveness of anticholinergic medications for sialorrhea in children.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus, and the Web of Science from inception until April 29, 2020. Studies reporting original data on the efficacy of anticholinergic medications in the management of sialorrhea in children aged 0 to 17 years of age were included. This review adhered to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) standards. Data on study design, setting, population, pharmacologic intervention(s), comparator(s), outcomes, and results were extracted and summarized.
RESULTS
The search strategy identified 2,800 studies of which 27 articles were included in the synthesis, including five randomized controlled trials. Each anticholinergic undergoing experimental study (glycopyrrolate, scopolamine/hyoscine, trihexyphenidyl/benzhexol, benztropine, and atropine) showed evidence of efficacy. Adverse side effects were common. Significant heterogeneity exists in the studies' methodology and the variability of outcome measures used between studies precluded a meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Glycopyrrolate, scopolamine/hyoscine, trihexyphenidyl/benzhexol, benztropine, and atropine have all shown efficacy in the treatment of sialorrhea in children. The small number of reports and the variability in study design precluded a meta-analysis. More studies are needed with uniformity in outcome measures to help guide evidence-based decision making. A guidance table is presented.
PubMed: 35599670
DOI: 10.1093/pch/pxab051 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Amblyopia is defined as impaired visual acuity in one or both eyes without demonstrable abnormality of the visual pathway, and is not immediately resolved by wearing...
BACKGROUND
Amblyopia is defined as impaired visual acuity in one or both eyes without demonstrable abnormality of the visual pathway, and is not immediately resolved by wearing glasses.
OBJECTIVES
In performing this systematic review, we aimed to synthesize the best available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of conventional occlusion therapy compared to atropine penalization in treating amblyopia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2018, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; LILACS BIREME; ClinicalTrials.gov; ISRCTN; and the WHO ICTRP on 7 September 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized/quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing conventional occlusion to atropine penalization for amblyopia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened abstracts and full-text articles, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven trials (five randomized controlled trials and two quasi-randomized controlled trials) conducted in six countries (China, India, Iran, Ireland, Spain, and the United States) with a total of 1177 amblyopic eyes. Three of these seven trials were from the original 2009 version of the review. We assessed two trials as having a low risk of bias across all domains, and the remaining five trials as having unclear or high risk of bias for some domains.As different occlusion modalities, atropine penalization regimens, and populations were used across the included trials, we did not conduct any meta-analysis due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Evidence from six trials (two at low risk of bias) suggests that atropine penalization is as effective as conventional occlusion in improving visual acuity. Similar improvement in visual acuity was reported at all time points at which it was assessed, ranging from five weeks (improvement of 1 line) to 10 years (improvement of greater than 3 lines). At six months, although most participants (363/522) come from a trial rated as at low risk of bias with a precise estimate (mean difference (MD) 0.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.06), two other trials rated as at high risk of bias produced inconsistent estimates and wide confidence intervals (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.07 and MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.05; moderate-certainty evidence). At 24 months, additional improvement was found in both groups, but there continued to be no meaningful difference between those receiving occlusion and those receiving atropine therapies (moderate-certainty evidence).We did not find any difference in ocular alignment, stereo acuity, or sound eye visual acuity between occlusion and atropine penalization groups (moderate-certainty evidence). Both treatments were well tolerated. Atropine was associated with better adherence (moderate-certainty evidence) and quality of life (moderate-certainty evidence), but also a higher reported risk of adverse events in terms of mild reduction in the visual acuity of the sound eye not requiring treatment and light sensitivity (high-certainty evidence). Skin, lid, or conjunctival irritation were more common among participants receiving patching than those receiving atropine (high-certainty evidence). Atropine penalization costs less than conventional occlusion.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Both conventional occlusion and atropine penalization produce visual acuity improvement in the amblyopic eye. Atropine penalization appears to be as effective as conventional occlusion, although the magnitude of improvement differed among the trials we analyzed.
Topics: Amblyopia; Atropine; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Occlusive Dressings; Ophthalmic Solutions; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 31461545
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006460.pub3 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Sep 2021To date, guidelines on the impact and value of atropine combined with omeprazole in the treatment of acute gastritis have not been well established or well defined. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To date, guidelines on the impact and value of atropine combined with omeprazole in the treatment of acute gastritis have not been well established or well defined. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and safety of combined atropine and omeprazole therapy for the management of patients with acute gastritis.
METHODS
Through searching the electronic database, the related literature of the combination of atropine with omeprazole in the treatment of acute gastritis were reviewed. A meta-analysis was performed after literature selection according to inclusion criteria. The treatment efficiency and the incidence of adverse reactions were used as the main outcome indicators. The odds ratios (ORs), standardized mean differences (SMDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the two treatment regimens were analyzed.
RESULTS
This study analyzed 11 articles from the literature with a total of 1,053 subjects. The combination of atropine and omeprazole significantly improved the clinical outcomes of patients with acute gastritis compared to patients treated with combined anisodamine and omeprazole (control group). The effective rate of combined atropine and omeprazole treatment was 1.21 times higher than that observed with the control group, and the incidence of adverse reactions was 0.41 times that of the control group. Atropine combined with omeprazole significantly alleviated the clinical symptoms of the patients. The total treatment time was shortened by 0.57 days, duration of abdominal pain was shortened by 2.82 days, duration of diarrhea was reduced by 1.99 days, and the duration of nausea and vomiting was shortened by 2.68 days compared to the control group.
DISCUSSION
The combination of atropine with omeprazole in the treatment of acute gastritis demonstrated a high effective rate with few adverse reactions than. It was effective at alleviating the clinical symptoms associated with acute gastritis. The results of this study provide support for the clinical implementation of combined atropine and omeprazole in the treatment of patients with acute gastritis.
Topics: Atropine; Gastritis; Humans; Omeprazole; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34628879
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-1868 -
Ophthalmology and Therapy Dec 2018Amblyopia therapy appears to be most effective in children under the age of 7 years, but results from randomized control trials (RCTs) have shown that occlusion therapy... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Amblyopia therapy appears to be most effective in children under the age of 7 years, but results from randomized control trials (RCTs) have shown that occlusion therapy and/or atropine penalization therapy may improve visual acuity in an older age group. Which of these two therapies is the most effective with fewer adverse effects in an older age group has not yet been agreed upon.
METHODS
We systematically searched the literature for RCTs that compared atropine penalization therapy and occlusion therapy in terms of their visual acuity outcomes and adverse events and performed a meta-analysis on the visual acuity data obtained. The adverse effects reported and their implications for clinical practice are discussed.
RESULTS
Two RCTs were identified, with the authors of both concluding that there was no detectable difference between the two therapies for the age groups they studied. The mean difference between atropine penalization and occlusion therapies was calculated to be - 0.01 logMAR (95% confidence interval - 0.07 to 0.03 logMAR) in favor of occlusion therapy, and no statistical difference between the two groups was detected (P = 0.45). Neither study detected a marked difference in terms of reported adverse effects from the two interventions.
CONCLUSION
Based on the results of our meta-analysis we conclude that there is no difference in visual acuity outcomes between atropine penalization therapy and occlusion therapy after 17 to 24 weeks of treatment in children aged 7-12 years. Further evidence to determine the efficacy of amblyopia therapy for an older patient population is required before studies comparing atropine penalization and occlusion therapy in patients older than 12 years can be performed. Atropine penalization therapy may cause more frequent minor adverse effects, such as light sensitivity, but in the clinical setting this needs to be balanced with the potential practical benefits of twice-weekly eye drops versus daily occlusion.
FUNDING
The funding for this study was provided by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Health Education England (HEE). A plain language summary is available for this article.
PubMed: 30328078
DOI: 10.1007/s40123-018-0151-9 -
European Journal of Internal Medicine Sep 2022Bradycardia, renal failure, atrioventricular (AV) nodal blockade, shock, and hyperkalemia (BRASH) syndrome is a recently-established entity precipitated by...
BACKGROUND
Bradycardia, renal failure, atrioventricular (AV) nodal blockade, shock, and hyperkalemia (BRASH) syndrome is a recently-established entity precipitated by medication-induced AV nodal blockade. Despite its serious consequences, including death, clinical presentations, risk factors, and outcomes of the syndrome have not been well defined. We aim to summarize the existing evidence of BRASH syndrome.
METHODS
According to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews, we performed a search on MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles with keywords including"BRASH syndrome" and "bradycardia, renal failure, atrioventricular nodal blockade, shock, and hyperkalemia," from the inception of these databases to March 4, 2022.
RESULTS
34 articles, including one observational study, 15 conference abstracts, and 18 case reports and case series, were included. While most patients were on beta blockers (83.3%) or calcium channel blockers (45.2%), other medications such as amiodarone were identified as precipitating agents. Atropine or glucagon were ineffective in reversing patients' symptoms, and 59.5% required inotropes or chronotropes. 7.1% expired due to BRASH syndrome.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review summarizes the clinical characteristics of BRASH syndrome. Further studies to identify risks associated with the onset of BRASH syndrome and awareness of the critical syndrome are warranted.
Topics: Atrioventricular Block; Bradycardia; Humans; Hyperkalemia; Observational Studies as Topic; Renal Insufficiency; Shock; Syndrome
PubMed: 35676108
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.06.002 -
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences... 2022Acute severe organophosphorus pesticide poisoning (ASOPP) is one of the major diseases that endanger human life and health. However, the effects of conventional therapy... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute severe organophosphorus pesticide poisoning (ASOPP) is one of the major diseases that endanger human life and health. However, the effects of conventional therapy including gastric lavages, mechanical ventilation, muscarinic antagonist drugs, and cholinesterase reactivators were uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of hemoperfusion combined with hemofiltration besides routine therapy for ASOPP.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive search for candidate publications was performed through PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, WanFang, Chinese Biomedical Literature, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from database inception to May 12, 2020. The retrieved studies were screened by the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data of important end points were extracted. The risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were pooled for categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively. Meta-analyses and publication bias were conducted by using STATA software version 15.1.
RESULTS
A total of 11 randomized controlled trials with 811 patients were included. Compared to conventional therapy group, patients in the hemoperfusion plus hemofiltration group were significantly superior with regard to mortality (RR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.25, 0.57], < 0.001), total atropine dosing (WMD -147.34 mg, 95% CI [-199.49, -95.18], < 0.001), duration of mechanical ventilation (WMD -2.34 days, 95% CI [-3.77, -0.92], < 0.001), cholinesterase recovery time (WMD -2.49 days, 95% CI [-3.14, -1.83], < 0.001), and length of stay (WMD -4.52 days, 95% CI [-5.31, -3.73], < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Combined hemoperfusion and hemofiltration was a very safe and effective treatment protocol for ASOPP, not only resulting in significantly decreased mortality but also resulting in reduced total atropine dosing, duration of mechanical ventilation, cholinesterase recovery time, and length of stay.
PubMed: 35548179
DOI: 10.4103/jrms.JRMS_822_20