-
Chudoku Kenkyu : Chudoku Kenkyukai Jun... Sep 2009
Review
Topics: Animals; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Foodborne Diseases; Hazardous Substances; Humans; Lethal Dose 50; Poisoning; Poisons
PubMed: 19882973
DOI: No ID Found -
Toxicology Sep 2009
Topics: Animals; Chemical Warfare Agents; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Mustard Gas; Poisoning
PubMed: 19386280
DOI: 10.1016/j.tox.2009.04.038 -
Acta Gastro-enterologica Belgica 1998
Review
Topics: Acetaminophen; Acute Disease; Amanita; Arsenic; Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury; Humans; Mushroom Poisoning; Poisoning; Poisons; Solvents
PubMed: 9923099
DOI: No ID Found -
Toxicology Oct 2005Sulphur mustard is one of the major chemical warfare agents developed and used during World War I. Large stockpiles are still present in several countries. It is... (Review)
Review
Sulphur mustard is one of the major chemical warfare agents developed and used during World War I. Large stockpiles are still present in several countries. It is relatively easy to produce and might be used as a terroristic weapon. Sulphur mustard is a vesicant agent and causes cutaneous blisters, respiratory tract damage, eye lesions and bone marrow depression. The clinical picture of poisoning is well known from the thousands of victims during World War I and the Iran-Iraq war. In the latter conflict, sulphur mustard was heavily used and until now about 30,000 victims still suffer from late effects of the agent like chronic obstructive lung disease, lung fibrosis, recurrent corneal ulcer disease, chronic conjunctivitis, abnormal pigmentation of the skin, and several forms of cancer. Despite enormous research efforts during the last 90 years, no specific sulphur mustard antidote has been found. The prospering knowledge and developments of modern medicine created nowadays new chances to minimize sulphur mustard-induced organ damage and late effects.
Topics: Chemical Warfare Agents; Humans; Mustard Gas; Poisoning
PubMed: 16084004
DOI: 10.1016/j.tox.2005.06.014 -
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue Mar 2022To explore the clinical features of acute diquat (DQ) poisoning, and further improve the awareness of acute DQ poisoning.
OBJECTIVE
To explore the clinical features of acute diquat (DQ) poisoning, and further improve the awareness of acute DQ poisoning.
METHODS
A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with acute DQ poisoning diagnosed in the emergency department of the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2021. The clinical data included age, gender, exposure routes, presence of pesticides (drugs) mixture poisoning, dosage of poison, the time from taking poisoning to admitting in the emergency department, clinical manifestations, laboratory data, treatment, hospital days, prognosis and survival days.
RESULTS
The number of cases who firstly complained of acute DQ poisoning in the past three years were 19 cases in 2019, 28 cases in 2020, and 51 cases in 2021. A total of 12 patients were excluded due to being diagnosed paraquat (PQ) poisoning by toxicology detection. Finally, 86 cases of acute DQ poisoning were included, including 80 cases of oral DQ poisoning, 1 case of intramuscular injection, 1 case of binocular contact and 4 cases of dermal exposure. In 80 cases of oral DQ poisoning, there were 70 cases of diquat poisoning alone (42 cases survived, 28 cases died) and 10 cases of pesticide mixture poisoning (6 cases survived, 4 cases died). The time from oral poisoning to admitting in the emergency department was 0.5-96.0 hours, with an average of (8.6±5.8) hours. The time of intramuscular injection poisoning to admitting in the emergency department was 3 hours. The time of dermal exposure to admitting in the emergency department was relatively long, with an average of 66.1 hours. The time from oral simple DQ poisoning to death was 12.0-108.0 hours, and the time from oral mixed DQ poisoning to death was 24.0-576.0 hours. A total of 70 patients with oral diquat poisoning alone presented various degrees of multiple organ injuries. All patients presented gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea and vomiting. Renal injury and central nervous system injury were the most significant and closely related to the prognosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Acute oral DQ poisoning can cause to multiple organ injuries, and the clinical manifestations are related to the dose of the poison. In severe cases, acute renal failure and refractory circulatory failure occur within 24 hours after poisoning, and severe central nervous system injury with disturbance of consciousness as the primary manifestation occurs within 36 hours, followed by multiple organ failure until death.
Topics: Diquat; Humans; Multiple Organ Failure; Paraquat; Poisoning; Poisons; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35574750
DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn121430-20220128-00105 -
American Journal of Therapeutics Aug 2021This study aims to compare the poisoned patients who could not be administered activated charcoal because of its unavailability with the poisoned patients who were...
BACKGROUND
This study aims to compare the poisoned patients who could not be administered activated charcoal because of its unavailability with the poisoned patients who were administered charcoal in the later period and to reveal the results about its effectiveness.
STUDY QUESTION
Is the use of activated charcoal effective against poisoning caused by oral medication?
STUDY DESIGN
This retrospective cohort study with historical control was planned at a tertiary hospital. Patients older than 18 years were admitted to the emergency department because of oral drug poisoning during the study periods. A total of 1159 patients who were not given activated charcoal and 877 patients who were given activated charcoal were included in this study.
MEASURES AND OUTCOMES
The frequency of clinical findings secondary to the drug taken, the frequency of antidote use, the frequency of intubation, and the hospitalization length were determined as clinical outcome parameters.
RESULTS
There was no statistically significant difference in the development of central nervous system findings, cardiovascular system findings, frequency of intubation, and blood gas disorders, as well as the length of hospitalization periods according to the activated charcoal application. Hepatobiliary system findings and electrolyte disturbances were found to be less common in patients given activated charcoal. The frequency of tachycardia, speech impairment, coma, and respiratory acidosis was found to be statistically higher in patients who were administered activated charcoal. The hospitalization period of the patients who were given activated charcoal was longer in patients with drug findings; however, there was no difference in the hospitalization periods of the patients who were given an antidote.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of activated charcoal in poisoned patients may not provide sufficient clinical benefits. However, clinical studies with strong evidence levels are needed to determine activated charcoal's clinical efficacy, which is still used as a universal antidote.
Topics: Antidotes; Charcoal; Humans; Poisoning; Poisons; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34469920
DOI: 10.1097/MJT.0000000000001422 -
Nature Jun 1949
Topics: Humans; Poisoning; Poisons
PubMed: 18144715
DOI: 10.1038/163912b0 -
Anales Del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra 2003We briefly comment on the state of clinical toxicology in Navarra and in the rest of Spain, with reference to the Toxicology Committee of Navarra and its aims.... (Review)
Review
We briefly comment on the state of clinical toxicology in Navarra and in the rest of Spain, with reference to the Toxicology Committee of Navarra and its aims. Epidemiological data from the Emergency Service of the Hospital of Navarra is presented, as well as where to find information on the subject; the epidemiological registration sheet designed by the SEMESTOX group is attached. A description is given of the characteristics of therapeutic drugs and drugs of abuse determination (type of sample, methodology and interpretation of results) carried out in the toxicological analytical unit of the Hospital of Navarra. Finally, reference is made to all of the antidotes available to the Pharmacy Service of the Hospital of Navarra, which is the reference center for the whole of the autonomous community of Navarra. A description is given for each medicine including its indications.
Topics: Humans; Poisoning; Poisons; Spain
PubMed: 12813476
DOI: No ID Found -
Seminars in Dialysis 2014Hemoperfusion is an extracorporeal treatment based on adsorption, historically reserved for the treatment of acute poisonings. Its use was popularized in the 1970s after... (Review)
Review
Hemoperfusion is an extracorporeal treatment based on adsorption, historically reserved for the treatment of acute poisonings. Its use was popularized in the 1970s after several in vitro and animal experiments had demonstrated its efficacy, and was even preferred over hemodialysis in the management of overdosed patients. With the advent of new and more efficient dialytic modalities, hemoperfusion is now less frequently performed in the Western world. However, hemoperfusion still remains popular in developing countries. The present article reviews the technique of hemoperfusion, the factors influencing poison clearance through adsorption and its current applications.
Topics: Animals; Hemoperfusion; Humans; Poisoning; Poisons; Sorption Detoxification
PubMed: 24823936
DOI: 10.1111/sdi.12246 -
Clinical Toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.) Feb 2024Hexahydrocannabinol is a hexahydro derivative of cannabinol. Poisoning with hexahydrocannabinol was first observed in Europe in May 2022. (Observational Study)
Observational Study
INTRODUCTION
Hexahydrocannabinol is a hexahydro derivative of cannabinol. Poisoning with hexahydrocannabinol was first observed in Europe in May 2022.
METHOD
This is a retrospective observational study of cases of self-reported hexahydrocannabinol exposure reported to French poison centres between 1 January 2022 and 31 May 2023.
RESULTS
There were 37 cases, including 19 in May 2023. The median age of the patients was 36 (interquartile range 28-43) years, and most were men. Eight patients had a history of substance use disorder. The route of exposure was ingestion in 24, inhalation (smoking or vaping) in 10, inhalation and ingestion in two and sublingual in one. Clinical features were neurological (85 per cent), cardiovascular (61 per cent), gastrointestinal (33 per cent), psychiatric (27 per cent) and ocular (21 per cent). Fifty-nine per cent of the patients were hospitalized. In four patients, the Poisoning Severity Score was 0 (asymptomatic); in 15 patients, the Score was 1 (minor); in 16, the Score was 2 (moderate); and in two cases, the Score was 3 (severe). In 70 per cent of patients, the outcome was known, and all recovered. Testing of biological samples was only undertaken in six cases. Five patients had positive blood or urine tests for hexahydrocannabinol; in two patients, tetrahydrocannabinol and metabolites were also detected. In addition, there was an additional patient in whom Δ- and Δ-tetrahydrocannabinol was detected in the substances used.
DISCUSSION
Clinical effects reported in this series included neuropsychiatric and somatic effects. Whilst these cases related to self-reported hexahydrocannabinol use, it is likely that tetrahydrocannabinol use also contributed to the effects in a substantial proportion of cases. This study has some limitations, such as the lack of available information due to the retrospective nature of the study. As a result, it probably overestimates the number of moderate and severe cases due to under-reporting of cases of little or no severity. Analysis of the patient's blood and urine was performed only in six patients, so we cannot be certain that the products consumed by the other patients were hexahydrocannabinol.
CONCLUSION
The clinical effects attributed to hexahydrocannabinol were neurological, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, psychiatric and ocular predominantly and were sometimes serious.
Topics: Male; Humans; Adult; Female; Poisons; Dronabinol; Retrospective Studies; Poison Control Centers; Europe; Poisoning
PubMed: 38426845
DOI: 10.1080/15563650.2024.2318409