-
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Oct 2022Bacillus anthracis can cause anthrax and is a potential bioterrorism agent. The 2014 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for medical... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Bacillus anthracis can cause anthrax and is a potential bioterrorism agent. The 2014 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for medical countermeasures against anthrax were based on in vitro data and expert opinion. However, a century of previously uncompiled observational human data that often includes treatment and outcomes is available in the literature for analysis.
METHODS
We reviewed treatment outcomes for patients hospitalized with anthrax. We stratified patients by meningitis status, route of infection, and systemic criteria, then analyzed survival by treatment type, including antimicrobials, antitoxin/antiserum, and steroids. Using logistic regression, we calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals to compare survival between treatments. We also calculated hospital length of stay. Finally, we evaluated antimicrobial postexposure prophylaxis (PEPAbx) using data from a 1970 Russian-language article.
RESULTS
We identified 965 anthrax patients reported from 1880 through 2018. After exclusions, 605 remained: 430 adults, 145 children, and 30 missing age. Survival was low for untreated patients and meningitis patients, regardless of treatment. Most patients with localized cutaneous or nonmeningitis systemic anthrax survived with 1 or more antimicrobials; patients with inhalation anthrax without meningitis fared better with at least 2. Bactericidal antimicrobials were effective for systemic anthrax; addition of a protein synthesis inhibitor(s) (PSI) to a bactericidal antimicrobial(s) did not improve survival. Likewise, addition of antitoxin/antiserum to antimicrobials did not improve survival. Mannitol improved survival for meningitis patients, but steroids did not. PEPAbx reduced risk of anthrax following exposure to B. anthracis.
CONCLUSIONS
Combination therapy appeared to be superior to monotherapy for inhalation anthrax without meningitis. For anthrax meningitis, neither monotherapy nor combination therapy were particularly effective; however, numbers were small. For localized cutaneous anthrax, monotherapy was sufficient. For B. anthracis exposures, PEPAbx was effective.
Topics: Adult; Anthrax; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Antitoxins; Bacillus anthracis; Biological Warfare Agents; Bioterrorism; Child; Hospitals; Humans; Mannitol; Protein Synthesis Inhibitors; Respiratory Tract Infections; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36251553
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciac536 -
Toxins Apr 2017Latrodectism or envenomation by widow-spiders is common and clinically significant worldwide. Alpha-latrotoxin is the mammalian-specific toxin in the venom that results... (Review)
Review
Latrodectism or envenomation by widow-spiders is common and clinically significant worldwide. Alpha-latrotoxin is the mammalian-specific toxin in the venom that results in toxic effects observed in humans. Symptoms may be incapacitating and include severe pain that can persist for days. The management of mild to moderate latrodectism is primarily supportive while severe cases have variously been treated with intravenous calcium, muscle relaxants, widow-spider antivenom and analgesic opioids. The object of this systematic review is to examine the literature on the clinical effectiveness of past and current treatments for latrodectism. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar were searched from 1946 to December 2016 to identify clinical studies on the treatment of latrodectism. Studies older than 40 years and not in English were not reviewed. There were only two full-publications and one abstract of placebo-controlled randomised trials on antivenom use for latrodectism. Another two randomised comparative trials compared the route of administration of antivenom for latrodectism. There were fourteen case series (including two abstracts), fourteen case reports and one letter investigating drug treatments for latrodectism with the majority of these also including antivenom for severe latrodectism. Antivenom with opioid analgesia is often the major treatment reported for latrodectism however; recent high quality evidence has cast doubt on the clinical effectiveness of this combination and suggests that other treatments need to be investigated.
Topics: Animals; Antivenins; Humans; Spider Bites; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28430165
DOI: 10.3390/toxins9040148 -
Health Technology Assessment... Aug 2016End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation followed by induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) and rabbit antihuman thymocyte immunoglobulin (Thymoglobuline,(®) Sanofi) as induction therapy and immediate-release tacrolimus [Adoport(®) (Sandoz); Capexion(®) (Mylan); Modigraf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Perixis(®) (Accord Healthcare); Prograf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Tacni(®) (Teva); Vivadex(®) (Dexcel Pharma)], prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf,(®) Astellas Pharma); belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix,(®) Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) [Arzip(®) (Zentiva), CellCept(®) (Roche Products), Myfenax(®) (Teva), generic MMF is manufactured by Accord Healthcare, Actavis, Arrow Pharmaceuticals, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Mylan, Sandoz and Wockhardt], mycophenolate sodium, sirolimus (Rapamune,(®) Pfizer) and everolimus (Certican,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) as maintenance therapy in children and adolescents undergoing renal transplantation.
DATA SOURCES
Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted to 7 January 2015 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science [via Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)], Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted to 15 January 2015 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Databases (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and EconLit (via EBSCOhost).
REVIEW METHODS
Titles and abstracts were screened according to predefined inclusion criteria, as were full texts of identified studies. Included studies were extracted and quality appraised. Data were meta-analysed when appropriate. A new discrete time state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed; graft function, and incidences of acute rejection and new-onset diabetes mellitus were used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death.
RESULTS
Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four non-RCTs were included. The RCTs only evaluated BAS and tacrolimus (TAC). No statistically significant differences in key outcomes were found between BAS and placebo/no induction. Statistically significantly higher graft function (p < 0.01) and less biopsy-proven acute rejection (odds ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.57) was found between TAC and ciclosporin (CSA). Only one cost-effectiveness study was identified, which informed NICE guidance TA99. BAS [with TAC and azathioprine (AZA)] was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) versus no induction (BAS was dominant). BAS (with CSA and MMF) was not predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus no induction (BAS was dominated). TAC (with AZA) was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus CSA (TAC was dominant). A model based on adult evidence suggests that at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000-30,000 per QALY, BAS and TAC are cost-effective in all considered combinations; MMF was also cost-effective with CSA but not TAC.
LIMITATIONS
The RCT evidence is very limited; analyses comparing all interventions need to rely on adult evidence.
CONCLUSIONS
TAC is likely to be cost-effective (vs. CSA, in combination with AZA) at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. Analysis based on one RCT found BAS to be dominant, but analysis based on another RCT found BAS to be dominated. BAS plus TAC and AZA was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY when all regimens were compared using extrapolated adult evidence. High-quality primary effectiveness research is needed. The UK Renal Registry could form the basis for a prospective primary study.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013544.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research HTA programme.
Topics: Abatacept; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antilymphocyte Serum; Azathioprine; Basiliximab; Child; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Therapy, Combination; Everolimus; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Kidney Transplantation; Models, Economic; Mycophenolic Acid; Recombinant Fusion Proteins; Sirolimus; Tacrolimus; Technology Assessment, Biomedical
PubMed: 27557331
DOI: 10.3310/hta20610 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Apr 2024Snakebite envenoming represents a significant and often neglected public health challenge, particularly in rural communities across tropical and subtropical regions. An... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Snakebite envenoming represents a significant and often neglected public health challenge, particularly in rural communities across tropical and subtropical regions. An estimated 1.2-5.5 million people are envenomed by snakebites annually. More than 125,000 of these bites are fatal, and 3-4 times as many results in disability/disfigurement. Despite its prevalence, collecting accurate epidemiological data on snakebite is challenging. This systematic review and meta-analysis collates global epidemiology data on snakebite morbidity and mortality.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, Cochrane and CINAHL Plus databases were searched for articles published between 2001-2022. Pooled incidence and mortality were obtained using random effects modelling, heterogeneity (I2) was tested, and sensitivity analyses performed. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed study quality.
RESULTS
Out of the four databases, 5,312 articles were found. After removing duplicates, 3,953 articles were screened by title and abstract and 65 articles containing information on snakebite epidemiology, encompassing 663,460 snakebites, were selected for analysis. The people most at risk for snakebite were men (59%), engaged in agricultural labour (27.5%), and residing in rural areas (66.7%). More than half (57%) of the reported bites resulted in envenoming. Incidents occurred frequently in the summer season (38.5%), during daytime (56.7%), and bites were most often to the lower limb (56.4%). Envenoming severity was frequently mild (46.7%), treated in hospital (68.3%), and was treated with anti-venom (64.7%). The pooled global incidence and mortality was 69.4 /100,000 population (95%CI: 36.8 to 101.9) and 0.33/100,000 population (95%CI, 0.14 to 0.52) per year, respectively. Stratified by continents, Asia had the highest incidence of 130.7/100,000 population (95%CI: 48.3 to 213.1) while Europe has the lowest with 0.7/100,000 population (95%CI: -0.2 to 1.5). The highest mortality was reported in Asia at 0.96/100,000 population (95% CI: 0.22 to 1.70), and Africa 0.44/100,000 population (95%CI: -0.03 to 0.84). Incidence was highest among inhabitants of lower-middle-income countries 132.7/100,000 population (95%CI: 55.4 to 209.9) while mortality was highest in low-income countries at 0.85/100,000 population (95% CI: -0.06 to 2.31).
CONCLUSION
Incidence and mortality rates noted here highlight the global impact of snakebite and underscore the critical need to address the burden of snakebite envenoming. It also reveals that while reported snakebite incidence was higher in lower-middle-income countries, the burden of mortality was greatest among inhabitants of low-income countries, again emphasising the need for greater efforts to tackle this neglected tropical disease.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Snake Bites; Antivenins; Incidence; Asia; Prevalence
PubMed: 38574167
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012080 -
Health Security 2015Concern about use of anthrax as a bioweapon prompted development of novel anthrax antitoxins for treatment. Clinical guidelines for the treatment of anthrax recommend... (Review)
Review
Concern about use of anthrax as a bioweapon prompted development of novel anthrax antitoxins for treatment. Clinical guidelines for the treatment of anthrax recommend antitoxin therapy in combination with intravenous antimicrobials; however, a large-scale or mass anthrax incident may exceed antitoxin availability and create a need for judicious antitoxin use. We conducted a systematic review of antitoxin treatment of inhalation anthrax in humans and experimental animals to inform antitoxin recommendations during a large-scale or mass anthrax incident. A comprehensive search of 11 databases and the FDA website was conducted to identify relevant animal studies and human reports: 28 animal studies and 3 human cases were identified. Antitoxin monotherapy at or shortly after symptom onset demonstrates increased survival compared to no treatment in animals. With early treatment, survival did not differ between antimicrobial monotherapy and antimicrobial-antitoxin therapy in nonhuman primates and rabbits. With delayed treatment, antitoxin-antimicrobial treatment increased rabbit survival. Among human cases, addition of antitoxin to combination antimicrobial treatment was associated with survival in 2 of the 3 cases treated. Despite the paucity of human data, limited animal data suggest that adjunctive antitoxin therapy may improve survival. Delayed treatment studies suggest improved survival with combined antitoxin-antimicrobial therapy, although a survival difference compared with antimicrobial therapy alone was not demonstrated statistically. In a mass anthrax incident with limited antitoxin supplies, antitoxin treatment of individuals who have not demonstrated a clinical benefit from antimicrobials, or those who present with more severe illness, may be warranted. Additional pathophysiology studies are needed, and a point-of-care assay correlating toxin levels with clinical status may provide important information to guide antitoxin use during a large-scale anthrax incident.
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Animals; Anthrax; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antigens, Bacterial; Antitoxins; Bioterrorism; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Immunoglobulin G; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Mass Casualty Incidents; Rabbits; Respiratory Tract Infections
PubMed: 26690378
DOI: 10.1089/hs.2015.0032 -
PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases Feb 2023Snakebite envenoming is a serious and life-threatening medical condition that predominantly affects people living in rural communities across Africa, Asia, and Latin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Assessing knowledge and awareness regarding snakebite and management of snakebite envenoming in healthcare workers and the general population: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Snakebite envenoming is a serious and life-threatening medical condition that predominantly affects people living in rural communities across Africa, Asia, and Latin America. As our climate changes, there is a growing concern that negative human-snake interactions will increase. Our ability to prevent and manage snakebite requires effective antivenoms as well as knowledge regarding the prevention and management of snakebite among healthcare workers and affected communities across the globe. This systematic review aims to assess existing levels of knowledge regarding snakebite prevention and management in both healthcare workers and affected communities.
METHODS
This review was conducted on studies reporting quantitative measurements to evaluate knowledge and practice regarding snakebite prevention and management published in major databases between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2021. Random effects modelling was used to obtain the pooled proportion. Heterogeneity (I2) was tested, and sensitivity analyses performed.
RESULTS
Out of 3,697 records, 16 studies from 12 countries assessing 7,640 participants were included. Four of the studies were ranked as good quality studies, 9 as fair, and 3 as poor. This study results demonstrated that 56% of the study population answered the knowledge question correctly (95% CI 48% to 63%, p < 0.001). High heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 97.29%), with marginal publication bias (Egger's regression test, p = 0.0814). Participants had relatively higher knowledge concerning use of antivenom as preferred treatment, followed by snakebite prevention, knowledge of signs and symptoms of snakebite, knowledge of first-aid, and knowledge of treatment. Participants had lower knowledge relating to types of snakes and the identification of snakes.
CONCLUSION
Adequate knowledge about snakebites and its management among the general population and healthcare workers was 56%. Healthcare workers and communities across Asia showed higher relative knowledge compared to those in Africa and the Middle East. These data suggest that further education is needed in both the general population and among healthcare workers to ensure that appropriate preventative and patient management techniques are being utilised in snakebite endemic regions. Greater local awareness of the risks and appropriate management of snakebite is required to reduce the burden of snakebite mortality and morbidity.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Snake Bites; Snakes; Antivenins; Health Personnel; Africa
PubMed: 36757933
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0011048 -
Transplantation Reviews (Orlando, Fla.) Dec 2023Recommendations of the use of antibody induction treatments in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are based on moderate quality and historical studies. This systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Recommendations of the use of antibody induction treatments in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are based on moderate quality and historical studies. This systematic review aims to reevaluate, based on actual studies, the effects of different antibody preparations when used in specific KTR subgroups.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE and CENTRAL and selected randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies looking at different antibody preparations used as induction in KTR. Comparisons were categorized into different KTR subgroups: standard, high risk of rejection, high risk of delayed graft function (DGF), living donor, and elderly KTR. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Thirty-seven RCT and 99 observational studies were finally included. Compared to anti-interleukin-2-receptor antibodies (IL2RA), anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) reduced the risk of acute rejection at two years in standard KTR (RR 0.74, 95%CI 0.61-0.89) and high risk of rejection KTR (RR 0.55, 95%CI 0.43-0.72), but without decreasing the risk of graft loss. We did not find significant differences comparing ATG vs. alemtuzumab or different ATG dosages in any KTR group.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite many studies carried out on induction treatment in KTR, their heterogeneity and short follow-up preclude definitive conclusions to determine the optimal induction therapy. Compared with IL2RA, ATG reduced rejection in standard-risk, highly sensitized, and living donor graft recipients, but not in high DGF risk or elderly recipients. More studies are needed to demonstrate beneficial effects in other KTR subgroups and overall patient and graft survival.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Antilymphocyte Serum; Immunosuppressive Agents; Kidney Transplantation; Alemtuzumab; Antibodies; Graft Rejection; Lymphocytes; Transplant Recipients; Graft Survival
PubMed: 37774445
DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2023.100795 -
Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2021Clinical trials evaluating the safety and antibody response of strategies to manipulate prophylactic and therapeutic immunity have been launched. We aim to evaluate... (Review)
Review
Clinical trials evaluating the safety and antibody response of strategies to manipulate prophylactic and therapeutic immunity have been launched. We aim to evaluate strategies for augmentation of host immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We searched clinical trials registered at the National Institutes of Health by 25 May 2021 and conducted analyses on inoculated populations, involved immunological processes, source of injected components, and trial phases. We then searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for their corresponding reports published by 25 May 2021. A bivariate, random-effects meta-analysis was used to derive the pooled estimate of seroconversion and adverse events (AEs). A total of 929,359 participants were enrolled in 389 identified trials. The working mechanisms included heterologous immunity, active immunity, passive immunity, and immunotherapy, with 62.4% of the trials on vaccines. A total of 9072 healthy adults from 27 publications for 22 clinical trials on active immunity implementing vaccination were included for meta-analyses. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) of seroconversion were 13.94, 84.86, 106.03, and 451.04 (all < 0.01) for vaccines based on protein, RNA, viral vector, and inactivated virus, compared with that of respective placebo/control treatment or pre-vaccination sera. The pooled ORs for safety, as defined by the inverse of systemic adverse events (AEs) were 0.53 (95% CI = 0.27-1.05; = 0.07), 0.35 (95% CI = 0.16-0.75; = 0.007), 0.32 (95% CI = 0.19-0.55; < 0.0001), and 1.00 (95% CI = 0.73-1.36; = 0.98) for vaccines based on protein, RNA, viral vector, and inactivated virus, compared with that of placebo/control treatment. A paradigm shift from all four immune-augmentative interventions to active immunity implementing vaccination was observed through clinical trials. The efficacy of immune responses to neutralize SARS-CoV-2 for these vaccines was promising, although systemic AEs were still evident for RNA-based and viral vector-based vaccines.
PubMed: 34959492
DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10121537 -
PloS One 2017B. anthracis anti-toxin agents are approved and included in the Strategic National Stockpile based primarily on animal infection trials. However, in the only anthrax... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
B. anthracis anti-toxin agents are approved and included in the Strategic National Stockpile based primarily on animal infection trials. However, in the only anthrax outbreak an approved anti-toxin agent was administered in, survival did not differ comparing recipients and non-recipients, although recipients appeared sicker.
OBJECTIVE
Employ a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate preclinical studies supporting anthrax anti-toxin agents.
DATA SOURCE
PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY
Compared survival with an anti-toxin agent versus control in B. anthracis challenged, antibiotic treated animals.
STUDY METHODS
Examine model and study design and the effect of anti-toxin agents on relative risk of death(95%CI) (RR).
RESULTS
From 9 studies, 29 experiments were analyzed which included 4 species (748 animals) and 5 agents; LFI, AIG, AVP-21D9, Raxibacumab, and ETI-204. Only five experiments were blinded and no experiment included the cardiopulmonary support sick B. anthracis patients receive. Only one agent in a single un-blinded experiment reduced RR significantly [0.45(0.22,0.940]. However, in six studies testing an agent in more than one experiment in the same species, agents had consistent survival effects across experiments [I2 = 0, p≥0.55 in five and I2 = 42%, p = 0.16 in one]. Within each species, agents had effects on the side of benefit; in one study testing AVP-21D9 in mice [0.11(0.01,1.82)] or guinea pigs [0.70(0.48,1.03)]; across eight rabbit studies testing LFI, Raxibacumab, AIG or ETI-204 [0.62(0.45,0.87); I2 = 17.4%, p = 0.29]; and across three monkey studies testing Raxibacumab, AIG or ETI-204 [0.66(0.34,1.27); I2 = 25.3%, p = 0.26]. Across all agents and species, agents decreased RR [0.64(0.52,0.79); I2 = 5.3%, p = 0.39].
LIMITATIONS
Incidence of selective reporting not identifiable.
CONCLUSIONS
Although overall significant, individually anti-toxin agents had weak beneficial effects. Lack of study blinding and relevant clinical therapies further weakened studies. Although difficult, preclinical studies with more robust designs and results are warranted to justify the resources necessary to maintain anti-toxin agents in national stockpiles.
Topics: Animals; Anthrax; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antigens, Bacterial; Antitoxins; Bacillus anthracis; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Research Design; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28797061
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182879 -
Systematic Reviews Apr 2017Scorpion stings cause an estimated 3000 deaths per annum worldwide. We conducted a systematic review of all controlled clinical trials related to scorpion sting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Scorpion stings cause an estimated 3000 deaths per annum worldwide. We conducted a systematic review of all controlled clinical trials related to scorpion sting management.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL and included controlled prospective clinical trials (randomized or non-randomized). The following interventions were assessed: adults and children with scorpion stings treated with (a) steroids vs. placebo, (b) different methods of pain relief, (c) antivenom vs. supportive treatment, (d) prazosin vs. supportive treatment, (e) antivenom vs. prazosin and (f) antivenom plus prazosin vs. prazosin alone. When trials had comparative outcomes, they were combined in a meta-analysis. Data was analysed with Review Manager 5. Dichotomous data were compared with relative risk (RR), and continuous data were compared with mean differences using a fixed effect model. There is no PROSPERO registration number for this study.
RESULTS
Antivenom against Centruroides sp. are effective in reversing the clinical syndrome faster than no antivenom treatment in children (RR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06; 322 participants; three trials). Antivenom (against Mesobuthus tamulus) and prazosin combination is better than prazosin alone for faster resolution of symptoms (mean difference, -12.59 h; 95% CI, -14.01 to -11.17; 173 participants; three trials).
CONCLUSIONS
The polyvalent antivenom against Centruroides sp. in USA/Mexico and the monovalent antivenom against M. tamulus in India are effective for rapid resolution of symptoms. Prazosin is useful as an add-on therapy for M. tamulus stings.
Topics: Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor Antagonists; Animals; Antivenins; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Pain; Prazosin; Scorpion Stings; Scorpion Venoms; Scorpions; Steroids
PubMed: 28390429
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0469-8