Posts tagged #toxicology

Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome

Written by: Maren Leibowitz, MD (NUEM ‘23) Edited by: Nick Wleklinski, MD (NUEM ‘22)
Expert Commentary by: Zachary Schmitz, MD (NUEM '21)



Expert Commentary

This is an awesome, focused review of neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS). NMS is hard to diagnose because it's rare. There is no gold standard with respect to its definition, and it requires a medication history (which we typically don't do very well in the emergency department). A tricky cause of NMS is the removal of a dopamine agonist. For this reason, carbidopa/levodopa should never be discontinued during hospital admission - or ED boarding. [1]

Supportive care is more important than antidotal therapy during NMS management. The most acute cause of death from NMS is hyperthermia, which is induced both by D2 receptor antagonism leading to rigidity and impaired thermoregulation from the striatum and hypothalamus. Any life-threatening hyperthermia should be treated immediately with an ice bath.[2] Rigidity will lead to rhabdomyolysis with subsequent hyperkalemia and myoglobin-induced renal failure. Therefore, fluid resuscitation and maintenance are important. Profound immobility can precipitate DVT, so anticoagulation may be necessary.

In terms of pharmacotherapy, benzodiazepines are universally used. Dantrolene inhibits calcium-mediated muscle contraction to reduce muscle rigidity. However, it doesn't address the underlying central D2 antagonism, and its efficacy has only been shown in case reports. Bromocriptine acts more centrally as a dopamine agonist but should be used cautiously in patients with psychiatric diseases as it may exacerbate psychosis. Overall, benzodiazepine use and supportive care should get you through most cases of NMS, though additional therapies may be necessary in severe cases.

References

1. Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Delayed Administration and Contraindicated Drugs Place Hospitalized Parkinson’s Disease Patients at Risk. 12 March 2015. Accessed February 11, 2022.

2. Juurlink JN. Antipsychotics. In: Nelson LS, Howland M, Lewin NA, Smith SW, Goldfrank LR, Hoffman RS. eds. Goldfrank's Toxicologic Emergencies, 11e. Page 1037-1039. McGraw Hill; 2019. Accessed February 11, 2022.

Zachary Schmitz, MD

Toxicology Fellow

Ronald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine

NYU Langone Health


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Leibowitz, M. Wleklinski, N. (2022, May 9). Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Schmitz, Z]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/neuroleptic-malignant-syndrome.


Other Posts You May Enjoy

Posted on May 9, 2022 and filed under Toxicology.

Beyond the Burns: Toxic House Fire Gases

Written by: Adam Payne, MD (NUEM ‘24) Edited by: Emily Wessling, MD (NUEM ‘22)
Expert Commentary by: Justin Seltzer, MD (NUEM ‘21)



Expert Commentary

Congratulations to Drs. Payne and Wessling on an excellent post. 

Management of toxic gas exposure from a house fire is essential knowledge for all emergency physicians. The two major toxic gases of interest are carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide; it is important to note that fires in other environments, such as factories or industrial sites, may result in alternative exposures based on the nature of the fire and materials present. The post goes into detail on the pathophysiology, signs, symptoms, and diagnosis of both carbon monoxide and cyanide poisonings, so this commentary will focus on the clinical approach. 

I recommend the following simplified process to streamline diagnosis and treatment decision making:

1. Start high flow oxygen (15L NRB) immediately (or, if intubated, give 100% FiO2)

High flow oxygen reduces the half life of carbon monoxide from ~5 hours to ~90 minutes. Oxygen can be discontinued once carboxyhemoglobin normalizes (<2%)

2. Obtain a carboxyhemoglobin level, lactic acid level, and a venous blood gas (arterial is unnecessary unless oxygenation is also a concern) as soon as possible

Unfortunately, there is some disagreement as to what constitutes a “toxic” carboxyhemoglobin level. Weaver, et al. established 25% as an inflection point for the development of severe sequelae, which is now a commonly used (though not universally agreed upon) threshold value. Also, when evaluating a carboxyhemoglobin level, it is essential to consider the time period prior to the level being drawn to avoid false reassurance. For example, a level drawn after 90 minutes of high flow oxygen will be reduced by roughly 50% and interpreted accordingly. Further, do not rely on external co-oximeters alone to rule out carbon monoxide poisoning given limited sensitivity at the moment (though the technology will likely improve over time).

3. Treat with hydroxocobalamin empirically if symptomatic and/or if lactic acid elevated 

Hydroxocobalamin is a low risk intervention with significant potential therapeutic benefit, so it should be given early if there is any clinical concern. The other major cyanide antidote, sodium thiosulfate, should only be used if hydroxocobalamin is not available as it has no efficacy advantage and an undesirable side effect profile. It is essential to avoid using nitrites, as inducing methemoglobinemia in the setting of coincidental carbon monoxide poisoning can dramatically worsen tissue hypoxia.

An elevated lactic acid is a surrogate for cyanide poisoning, specifically a level of 8-10 mmol/L or greater is sensitive and should prompt intervention. More modest lactic acid elevations are less likely to be related to cyanide poisoning and should not prompt intervention, especially in an asymptomatic patient, unless the level is persistently elevated despite adequate resuscitation. Cyanide levels, while diagnostic, are of no acute clinical utility since they are rarely available in a timely manner. 

4. Consider hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) if readily available

HBOT for the treatment of carbon monoxide poisoning is controversial. While HBOT reduces the half life of carbon monoxide to roughly 20-30 minutes, HBOT is not used for this purpose alone. In fact, HBOT is primarily used to reduce associated cognitive, behavioral, and neurologic changes (collectively known as delayed neuropsychiatric sequelae). There is lower quality evidence for reduced myocardial infarction and mortality risk as well. 

However, several factors limit HBOT use. Primarily, it is not universally available at most institutions, incurring the risk and cost of transport to a distant site. The benefit is thought to be highest when the treatment is performed early (ideally within six hours of exposure), which adds to the logistical burden. Additionally, many chambers are not operated on nights and weekends, and of those available at off hours, many are unable to accommodate intubated patients. Recognizing the controversial nature of HBOT, the 2016 ACEP position statement noted that HBOT or high flow, normobaric oxygen can be used to treat carbon monoxide poisoning; though it likely carries clinical benefit in certain situations, at this time HBOT is not the standard of care for severe carbon monoxide poisoning. Rather, it should be offered if it can be readily and reasonably arranged.

Keeping this in mind, the following are generally accepted indications for HBOT in the setting of carbon monoxide poisoning

  • Loss of consciousness associated with exposure

  • Altered mental status

  • Focal neurologic changes

  • Evidence of end organ ischemia (pH ≤ 7.1, EKG changes, elevated troponin, angina)

  • Pregnancy (with some resources citing a level ≥20%)

  • Carboxyhemoglobin level ≥25%

Importantly, these are not hard and fast rules and there is no firm guideline mandating when HBOT should or should not be used. As a result, it is prudent to involve a medical toxicologist early in the process. 

In summary, a few key take home points:

  • Carbon monoxide and cyanide are strongly associated with house fires – assume exposure to both until proven otherwise

  • It is reasonable to treat any undifferentiated, symptomatic patient with high flow oxygen and hydroxocobalamin empirically; asymptomatic patients can wait safely for blood work on high flow oxygen alone

  • The decision making regarding use of HBOT, in particular, is complex – early consultation with a medical toxicologist is strongly encouraged

Justin Seltzer, MD

Toxicology Fellow

Department of Emergency Medicine

University of California, San Diego


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Payne, A. Wessling, E. (2022, May 2). Toxic House Fire Gases. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Seltzer, J]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/toxic-house-fire-gases


Other Posts You May Enjoy

Posted on May 2, 2022 and filed under Toxicology.

Toxic Alcohols

Written by: Rafael Lima, MD (NUEM ‘23) Edited by: Laurie Aluce, MD (NUEM ‘21)
Expert Commentary by: Zachary Schmitz (NUEM ‘21)


Methanol Toxicity

Methanol itself is not toxic to the body. Methanol’s metabolite, formic acid, causes toxicity at serum levels greater than 20mg/dl [1].

Clinical Findings of Methanol Poisoning

  • CNS sedation

  • Seizures

  • Rapid, Deep Breathing

  • Hypotension

  • Ocular findings: 

    • Blindness 

    • Afferent pupillary defect

    • Optic disk hyperemia

    • Mydriasis

Ethylene Glycol Toxicity

Similarly, the toxic metabolites of ethylene glycol cause end-organ damage at levels greater than 20mg/dl. The most notable toxic metabolites are glycolic acid and oxalic acid.” [1] .

Clinical Findings of Ethylene Glycol Poisoning

  • CNS sedation

  • Seizures

  • Cranial nerve palsies

  • Rapid, deep breathing

  • Hypotension

  • Hypocalcemia (can result in tetany) 

  • Renal findings: 

    • Oliguria

    • Acute renal failure

    • Flank pain

    • Hematuria

    • Oxalate crystals in the urine under fluorescence

Isopropyl Alcohol Toxicity

Found in hand sanitizers and disinfectants, isopropyl alcohol is a less common source of alcohol poisoning.  The parent molecule does exhibit toxic effects here, unlike methanol and ethylene glycol. If untreated, the lethal dose is between 4-8 g/kg [2].

Alcohol dehydrogenase metabolizes isopropyl alcohol into acetone. Because acetone is a ketone, and ketones are not oxidized into carboxylic acids, isopropyl alcohol poisoning does not result in anion gap metabolic acidosis. 

Clinical Findings of Isopropyl Alcohol Poisoning

  • CNS sedation

  • Disconjugate gaze

  • Fruity breath odor

  • Hypotension

  • Hematemesis

  • Pulmonary edema

Plasma Osmolal Gap

One of the most reliable laboratory markers of toxic alcohol poisoning is a large osmolal gap. The osmolal gap is defined as the difference between the measured serum osmolality and the calculated, or expected, plasma osmalality:

OSMOLAR GAP = Measured plasma osmolality – calculated/expected plasma osmolality 

The common equation for calculating the expected plasma osmolality is listed below [3]. Of note, there are other formulas with slight variations. Using an online calculator can be helpful. 

Expected Serum Osmolality=2[Na]+BUN/2.8+Glucose/18

A gap < 10 is considered normal. Any elevation above 10 should raise the clinician’s suspicion of toxic alcohol ingestion.

Note: this tool is not helpful in late presentations as the metabolized forms of the different alcohols do not contribute to the osmolal gap. The calculated gap will be falsely low in late-stage poisoning.

Treatment of Toxic Alcohol Ingestions

Consult your medical toxicologist or poison control center if toxic alcohol ingestion is suspected.

The national poison control center hotline telephone number is 1(800)-222-1222.

Fomepizole

Fomepizole should be used only for methanol and ethylene glycol ingestions. It is not indicated for isopropyl alcohol intoxications [4]. It is an inhibitor of alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH). Evidence shows that it is a superior antidote to ethanol [5]. 

  • Loading dose 15 mg/kg IV

  • Then 10 mg/kg every 12 hours

Continue until blood pH is normal and serum alcohol concentration is less than 20 mg/dL in the presence of retinal or renal injury.

Ethanol

Ethanol works as a competitive inhibitor of ADH, having a higher affinity for the enzyme compared to the other alcohols. Ethanol was used historically before the effects of fomepizole were studied. Fomepizole is now the preferred treatment because the administration of ethanol is more difficult, ethanol causes sedation, and titration of the therapy is challenging in co-ingestions [6]. If ethanol must be used, the preferred route is IV and the studied therapeutic target level is 100 mg/dL [7]. 

Supplemental Therapy

Methanol poisoning patients should also receive folic acid (50mg IV every 6 hours) [7].

Ethylene glycol poisoning patients should also receive thiamine  (100mg IV) and pyridoxine (50mg IV) [8].

Hemodialysis

Consult your nephrologist early if you are considering hemodialysis. Renal replacement therapy should be considered in the following situations [9]:

  • Anion gap metabolic acidosis with known toxic alcohol ingestion

  • End-organ damage

    • Renal failure

    • Vision changes

  • Unexplained anion gap metabolic acidosis with elevated osmolal gap in suspected toxic alcohol ingestion


References

1. Liesivuori, J. and H. Savolainen, Methanol and formic acid toxicity: biochemical mechanisms. Pharmacol Toxicol, 1991. 69(3): p. 157-63.

2. Slaughter, R.J., et al., Isopropanol poisoning. Clin Toxicol (Phila), 2014. 52(5): p. 470-8.

3. Bhagat, C.I., et al., Calculated vs measured plasma osmolalities revisited. Clin Chem, 1984. 30(10): p. 1703-5.

4. Su, M., R.S. Hoffman, and L.S. Nelson, Error in an emergency medicine textbook: isopropyl alcohol toxicity. Acad Emerg Med, 2002. 9(2): p. 175.

5. McMartin, K., D. Jacobsen, and K.E. Hovda, Antidotes for poisoning by alcohols that form toxic metabolites. Br J Clin Pharmacol, 2016. 81(3): p. 505-15.

6. Zakharov, S., et al., Fomepizole versus ethanol in the treatment of acute methanol poisoning: Comparison of clinical effectiveness in a mass poisoning outbreak. Clin Toxicol (Phila), 2015. 53(8): p. 797-806.

7. Barceloux, D.G., et al., American Academy of Clinical Toxicology practice guidelines on the treatment of methanol poisoning. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol, 2002. 40(4): p. 415-46.

8. Ghosh, A. and R. Boyd, Leucovorin (calcium folinate) in "antifreeze" poisoning. Emerg Med J, 2003. 20(5): p. 466.

9. Moreau, C.L., et al., Glycolate kinetics and hemodialysis clearance in ethylene glycol poisoning. META Study Group. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol, 1998. 36(7): p. 659-66.


Expert Commentary

Thank you for this great review of a difficult subject! The combination of a lack of quick, confirmatory testing with delayed onset of symptoms makes toxic alcohol poisoning an incredibly difficult diagnosis to make. Additionally, even small ingestion can lead to major complications. For example, if a typical four-year-old (19kg) child drank windshield washer fluid that contained 50% methanol (a fairly standard formulation), it would take only 5.7 mL to potentially produce a methanol serum concentration of 25 mg/dL. Given the average 4-year-old’s mouthful is 8.9 mL, you can run into trouble quickly.[1]

We frequently see misuse or misunderstanding of osmol and anion gaps in diagnosing toxic alcohol ingestion when history is unclear. First, although a normal osmol gap is generally less than 10, baseline osmol gaps range from -10 to +14.[2] Therefore, a gap of 16 may represent a true gap of +2 in one person and +26 in another. Second, ethanol must be included in the osmol gap equation. An ethanol concentration of 200 mg/dL would increase your osmol gap by 43.5. Third, given metabolism over time, all values included in an anion gap calculation need to be drawn off of the same blood sample.

These considerations make finding the diagnosis even more complicated, but there are a few things that can help you out. First, an osmol gap > 50 is highly concerning for toxic alcohol. Second, an ethanol concentration > 100 mg/dL is sufficient to block ADH, meaning that few toxic metabolites from methanol or ethylene glycol could be made.[3] This means that an anion gap present with an ethanol > 100 mg/dL is not from toxic alcohol (unless the patient drank the ethanol after the toxic alcohol, which is very rare). Third, sequential values over time can be helpful. Metabolism of toxic alcohols should lead to a decreased osmol gap and increased anion gap over time. Proper use of the osmol and anion gap can help identify patients at high risk for morbidity and mortality while decreasing unnecessary administration of fomepizole, which typically costs thousands of dollars.

References

  1. Ratnapalan S, Potylitsina Y, Tan LH, Roifman M, Koren G. Measuring a toddler's mouthful: toxicologic considerations. Journal of Pediatrics. 2003 Jun;142(6):729-30. doi: 10.1067/mpd.2003.216

  2. Hoffman RS, Smilkstein MJ, Howland MA, Goldfrank LR. Osmol gaps revisited: normal values and limitations. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1993;31(1):81-93.  doi: 10.3109/15563659309000375.

  3. Jacobsen D, McMartin KE. Methanol and ethylene glycol poisonings: mechanism of toxicity, clinical course, diagnosis and treatment. Med Toxicol. 1986;1:309-334.

Zachary Schmitz, MD

Zachary Schmitz, MD

Toxicology Fellow

Ronald O. Perelman Department of Emergency Medicine

NYU Langone Health


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Lima, R. Aluce, L. (2022, Jan 24). Toxic Alcohols. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Schmitz, Z]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/toxic-alcohols


Other Posts You May Enjoy

Posted on March 28, 2022 and filed under Pharmacology, Toxicology.

Marine Envenomations

Written by: Michael Tandlich, MD (NUEM ‘24) Edited by: Chloe Renshaw, MD (NUEM ‘22)
Expert Commentary by: Justin Seltzer, MD (NUEM ‘21)



Expert Commentary

An excellent post by Drs. Tandlich and Renshaw. Marine envenomations are common problems around the world. Like with land-based envenomations, the venomous organisms of note vary with geography; jellyfish encountered in Australia are different from those encountered in Florida, for example. As a result, we will focus on major envenomations in the United States. 


The invertebrates account for a large but ultimately unknown number of envenomations. Cnidaria includes jellyfish, hydrozoa, anemones, and fire coral. A majority of stings from this group result in painful dermatitis; tentacles create a “whip-like” pattern on the skin, whereas fire coral creates localized skin wheals. The sea nettle and Portuguese man-of-war are of greatest interest, given their potential to cause severe systemic symptoms. Box jellyfish are rare in US coastal waters but produce a life-threatening toxicity. 

Initial treatment is somewhat controversial. Many resources advocate for the use of seawater for the initial decontamination, given concern for vinegar triggering nematocyst release in some species common to US waters. However, further research is needed to determine which is best. At this time, seawater is recommended for empiric decontamination in the US unless a box jellyfish is strongly suspected, in which case vinegar is appropriate (a very rare circumstance). Systemically ill box jellyfish envenomations should be treated with pain and blood pressure control. The antivenom is not readily available in the US and is unlikely to be beneficial in the time course it would take to obtain it.

Echinodermata, which includes sea urchins, have mild venom on their spines that can cause local tissue irritation and pain. There are reports of severe envenomations with systemic symptoms, but this is ultimately quite rare. These injuries respond well to hot water immersion. Imaging and local wound exploration for retained spines are recommended. Soaking the wound in vinegar may help dissolve superficial spines.  

Of the vertebrates, stingrays and spiny fish are of primary concern. 

Stingrays stings are common and can cause serious penetrating trauma but envenomation mainly produces localized pain and swelling. The venom is heat-labile, so significant pain relief can be achieved with hot water immersion. Stingrays stings have the potential for both retained stinger and wound infections; evaluation for retained stinger with radiographs and local wound exploration is recommended along with prophylactic antibiotics. 


Spinyfish, in particular stonefish, lionfish, and scorpionfish, have venom located in their spines. Stonefish have the most potent venom of any known fish. Lionfish are not native to the US but have become an invasive species. Human contact with these fish occurs both in the wild and in aquariums. These fish also have heat-labile venom susceptible to hot water immersion. However, systemically ill stonefish envenomations should receive the antivenom as this envenomation can be life-threatening; the antivenom will likely work against other spiny fish too, however, these other envenomations are usually much less severe and rarely require more than hot water immersion and supportive care. 

So key learning points:

  • Most marine envenomations involve heat-labile venom. Hot water immersion is likely to help reduce local symptoms.

  • Systemic illness is rare but some marine envenomations can produce life-threatening toxicity. Be very wary of a systemically ill envenomation and try to figure out the source due to the limited availability of antivenoms.

  • Prophylactic antibiotics are recommended for stingray stings as they tend to get infected but otherwise are generally not necessary in most populations. Good wound care, evaluation for retained foreign bodies, and tetanus prophylaxis are the mainstays. 

  • For further information, see this review article 

Justin Seltzer, MD

UCSD Health Toxicology Fellow

Emergency Physician, UCSD Health


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Tandlich, M. Renshaw, C. (2022, Mar 7). Marine Envenomations. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Seltzer, J]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/marine-envenomations


Other Posts You May Enjoy

Posted on March 7, 2022 and filed under Environmental, Toxicology.

Stingray Stings

Written by: Mike Tandlich, MD (NUEM ‘24) Edited by: Peter Serina, MD, MPH (NUEM ‘22)
Expert Commentary by: Mike Macias, MD (NUEM ‘17)



Expert Commentary

Thank you Drs. Tandlich and Serina for this excellent infographic summarizing stingray envenomation! The good news is that the majority of stingray injuries are nonfatal and will heal without any complications! You hit all of the key points however I just wanted to highlight a few management tips below: 

Treat as a Trauma! 

While majority of the pain from stingray envenomation occurs as a result of its venom, it is important to remember that this is also a traumatic injury. Treat the injury just like you would any other penetrating trauma. Consider the location as well as surrounding structures and make sure to properly examine for tendon, nerve, and vascular injury. Injuries to the chest or abdominal regions should prompt advanced imaging and trauma consultation. 

Hot Water is Key! 

Stingray envenomation is noted to cause severe pain that is often out of proportion to your examination findings. While the exact mechanism is not clear, the venom can lead to not only pain but also local tissue necrosis. The good news is the venom is heat labile! The faster you can get the injured area into hot water the better. You want the water to be as hot as tolerable without causing a thermal burn. A good rule of thumb is to have the patient place their unaffected limb in the water first to see if it is tolerable. As this often occurs at a beach, lifeguards are often your best resource to get hot water fast! Oral analgesics can be administered if needed however often they are unnecessary as soon as the injured area is submerged in hot water. 

Retained Barb?

While uncommon, a retained barb from the envenomation can occur so be sure to consider this and evaluate appropriately. Traditionally, x-ray imaging of the affected area is performed to evaluate for a radio-opaque barb however some evidence suggests this to be a relatively low yield practice [1]. Ultrasound can also be considered if there is suspicion for retained barb or other material. In general ultrasound has been shown to be highly sensitive for identification of foreign body [2]. Not only can it be used to identify the barb but it can be used to facilitate removal [3]. 

Give Prophylactic Antibiotics 

Prophylactic antibiotics are recommended for stingray envenomation given that the limited data suggest a higher rate of wound infection in patients who were not initially treated with antibiotics [1]. Given these injuries often occur in the ocean make sure to cover for salt water species such as Vibro. Levofloxacin is my go to option.

Teach The Stingray Shuffle! 

Keeping these key management points in mind, the good news is that the majority of stingray injuries are nonfatal and will heal without any complications! Before your patient is discharged don’t forget to remind them that the next time they are going out for a surf to do the stingray shuffle!

References

  1. Clark RF, Girard RH, Rao D, Ly BT, Davis DP. Stingray envenomation: a retrospective review of clinical presentation and treatment in 119 cases. J Emerg Med. 2007 Jul;33(1):33-7

  2. Aras MH, Miloglu O, Barutcugil C, Kantarci M, Ozcan E, Harorli A. Comparison of the sensitivity for detecting foreign bodies among conventional plain radiography, computed tomography and ultrasonography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2010;39(2):72-78. doi:10.1259/dmfr/68589458

  3. Nwawka OK, Kabutey NK, Locke CM, Castro-Aragon I, Kim D. Ultrasound-guided needle localization to aid foreign body removal in pediatric patients. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2014;53(1):67-70. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2013.09.006

Michael Macias, MD

Systems Clinical Ultrasound Director,
Emergent Medical Associates

Ultrasound Director,
UHS SoCal MEC Residency Programs


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Tandlich, M. Serina, P. (2021, Nov 15). Stingray Stings. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Macias, M]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/stingray-stings


Other Posts You May Enjoy

Posted on November 15, 2021 and filed under Environmental.

Management of Snake Bite Injuries

Written by: Rafael Lima, MD (NUEM ‘23) Edited by: Mike Conrardy, MD (NUEM ‘21) Expert Commentary by: Sean Bryant, MD

Written by: Rafael Lima, MD (NUEM ‘23) Edited by: Mike Conrardy, MD (NUEM ‘21) Expert Commentary by: Sean Bryant, MD


An estimated 10,000 patients visit emergency departments for snake bite injuries each year in the United States [1]. The number of snake bite occurrences an emergency department sees depends largely on the geographic area of practice. While there are known remedies for these incidents, snake bites can be devastating if not promptly managed, meaning emergency physicians should be knowledgeable in the subject. In this article, we review the common management of snake bite injuries and envenomations for the two major snake groups in the United States.

Overview

There are about 20 known venomous species of snakes in the United States. While most envenomations occur in the Southwestern United States, every region is home to at least one species of venomous snake [2]. Not all snake bites result in envenomation. At least 25% of venomous snake bites are dry. You should still suspect envenomation upon the patient’s initial presentation and rule it out by monitoring their clinical symptoms and progression.

Identification of the snake is useful in guiding management of care, but it should not be attempted if doing so poses any additional risk to the patient or provider. In the United States, venomous snakes generally fall under two categories: Crotaline/pit vipers in the Viperidae family, and coral snakes in the Elapidae family.


Crotaline (Pit Vipers)

This group of snakes has historically been responsible for the more severe envenomations between the two groups [3]. The WHO classifies pit vipers in CAT 1 of their venom database, describing them as highly venomous with high rates of morbidity and mortality [4].

Pit vipers generally have a triangular shaped head with heat-sensing “pits” located on the face. They frequently have a rattle on their tail, but not all pit vipers are rattlesnakes. Copperheads and cottonmouth snakes are also included in this group.

Crotaline venom causes localized tissue necrosis and congestive coagulopathy. This can be identified by a prolonged INR, PT, PTT, and thrombocytopenia. Additionally, the viper venom can cause capillary and cellular membranes to increase in permeability. Large amounts of venom can cause diffuse vaso-extravasation and hemolysis that can lead to hypovolemic shock and DIC if untreated.

CroFab is the antivenom of choice for cotaline envenomation. It is a polyvalent antivenom, meaning it contains antibodies derived from the venom of multiple different species of snakes. Administration is titrated based on clinical and symptom response.


Elapidae

The venomous Elapidae snake in the United States is the coral snake. There are less severe envenomations from coral snakes compared to pit vipers. This is a result of how venom is administered between the two groups: pit vipers have venom glands that inject venom directly through the fangs, while coral snakes rely on passive seeping of venom through their glands while they chew.

Source: Tad Arensmeier from St. Louis, MO, USA

Source: Tad Arensmeier from St. Louis, MO, USA

Coral snakes can be identified by their brightly colored rings extending along the length of the whole body. Usually, every other ring is yellow, separating the wider red or black rings in between. The common saying “red on yellow, kill a fellow; red on black, venom lack” has been been used to differentiate between venomous coral snakes and their harmless look-alikes in North America. A further level of differentiation is how far the rings extend circumferentially around the snake. Rings encircle the entire body in venomous coral snakes, while harmless look-alikes do not have the red coloration on the ventral side [5].

Source: Dawson at English Wikipedia

Source: Dawson at English Wikipedia

Venomous bites by coral snakes usually elicit little to no pain. This is because the Elapidae venom acts upon the neuromuscular junction and inhibits acetylcholine receptors. Clinical manifestations are predominantly neurological. Envenomation can cause lethargy, confusion, salivation, cranial nerve palsies, and respiratory paralysis. Symptoms are usually delayed, up to 12 hours from the initial bite. Coagulopathy and tissue necrosis does not happen with coral snake venom [2]. Unfortunately, the Elapidae antivenom is no longer manufactured in the United States and there is a limited supply available.

 ED Work Up

As in all patients who present to the emergency department, first ensure that airway, breathing, and circulation are intact. All suspected snake bite injuries warrant a prompt toxicology or poison center consult.

Sometimes, patients will bring in a dead or decapitated snake for identification in the emergency department. DO NOT attempt to handle a snake the patient brought in for identification, even if it is dead. Many snakes have intact reflexes that are preserved even after death or decapitation and you can still be bitten and envenomated by a dead snake!

Examine the injury and look for clear fang marks or puncture wounds. Get a history focused on the timing of the injury, medication allergies, and description of the snake, if known. The borders of erythema should be measured and marked serially.

Laboratory work-up is focused on assessing coagulopathy and hemolysis, especially if the snake is a confirmed pit viper or is unknown. Obtain CBC with platelet count, PT, PTT, INR, fibrinogen, and D-dimer. It is also important to check a baseline set of electrolytes with a basic chem panel, assess the extent of myonecrosis with a CK, and assess for renal damage with a UA.

Manage the wound with copious irrigation and exploration for retained foreign bodies (ie. fangs or teeth). Inquire about the patient’s tetanus status and administer if they are not up to date. Do not attempt to tourniquet or suction venom out of the wound. There is no evidence for routine antibiotic use in snake injuries [6].

Crotaline Bite Management

Consider using CroFab antivenom if the local area of injury and erythema is expanding. If coagulopathy is detected, do not treat with heparin or FFP. Give antivenom first, as unneutralized venom will react with clotting factor replacements [2]. Patients with abnormal coagulation studies within 12 hours after CroFab administration are more likely to develop recurrent coagulopathy. In these patients, repeat coagulation studies should be obtained every 48 hours until resolved. If lab values are worsening, then antivenom retreatment should be reconsidered [7].

Observe the affected limb for compartment syndrome. If clinical suspicion is high for compartment syndrome, consider formally measuring compartment pressures. Elevate the affected limb, and administer extra vials of antivenom. Antivenom administration is preferred over fasciotomy in the treatment of compartment syndrome caused by Crotaline venom [8].

Crofab, the Crotaline antivenom, is typically administered in stepwise fashion and is titrated to clinical resolution of symptoms. Administer 4-6 vials of CroFab antivenom and watch for clinical improvement at the local site of injury. If no improvement seen, administer 4-6 more vials. Repeat until control is achieved, meaning a reversal of symptoms, such as erythema, swelling, pain. Then administer 2 vial doses 6 hours later, then 12 hours, then 18 hours. Envenomation patients should be monitored for at least 8 hours. Keep epinephrine and antihistamines nearby in case of anaphylaxis or allergy to antivenom [2].

Elapidae Bite Management

Because of their potential devastating neurologic effects, coral snake bites should be empirically treated with antivenom and monitored for respiratory deterioration. Provide good supportive care, including intubation and ventilation, if necessary. Avoid opioids for pain management as they may mask symptoms of impending neurologic manifestations. Patients with suspected coral snake envenomations should be monitored for 12 hours after the initial bite [2].


Expert Commentary

Thank you, Dr. Lima for bringing the important and timely topic of snakebites to the table by posting this excellent overview!  Current poison center data (2018 National Poison Data System) indicate a total of 4,013 crotalid exposures with the majority being copperheads.  While morbidity is worrisome, mortality was fortunately low in our country with only one fatality reportedly from a rattlesnake [1].

Prehospital snakebite management has been an area of deserved scrutiny.  Limb immobilization, analgesia, and transport to a medical facility are critical actions.  Tourniquets, pressure immobilization bandages, cryotherapy, electrotherapy, and incision/suction are not recommended and are likely harmful.  One researcher discovered that venom extraction suction devices “just suck” [2].  Having a cell phone in the field is most important to prevent loss of limb or life!

In other regions of the world, capturing or killing the snake may be optimal in determining which species specific antivenom to administer.  For North American crotalids, however, this practice is discouraged and exceedingly dangerous.  Both CroFab and Anavip (recently approved and now marketed with the goal of reducing risks of late coagulopathy) are prepared from several species of North American crotalids and can be used to manage any crotalid envenomation.  These contemporary antivenoms (Fab fragments) are safer than older polyvalent antivenom that resulted in high rates of anaphylaxis. 

Consult your regional poison center (1-800-222-1222) or staff medical toxicologist when managing snakebites!  For the number of snakebites that present to the emergency department, poison centers manage severalfold more each year.  Making decisions regarding the management of a limb that resembles compartment syndrome (more antivenom vs. surgical consultation), the interpretation of laboratory results, redosing of antivenom to gain initial control of swelling, and the management of nonindigenous (e.g. cobras, gaboon vibers) pet snakebites are nuances your subspecialists would love to collaborate on!

References

1. Gummin DD, Mowry JB, Spyker DA, BrooksDE, Beuhler MC, RiversLJ, Hashem HA, & Ryan ML 2018 Annual Report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers’ National Poison Data System (NPDS): 36th Annual Report, Clinical Toxicology, 2019;57:1220-1413.

2.  Bush SP.  Snakebite Suction Devices Don’t Remove Venom: They Just Suck.  Annals of Emergency Medicine, 2004;43:187-188.

Sean Bryant.PNG

Sean Bryant, MD

Assistant Director, Toxicology Fellowship Program, Department of Emergency Medicine, Cook County Health

Associate Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, Rush Medical College


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Lima, R. Cornardy, M. (2020, Oct 26). Management of Snake Bite Injuries. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Bryant, S]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/snake-bites.


Other Posts You May Enjoy

References

  1. Snakebite Injuries Treated in United States Emergency Departments, 2001–2004. O’Neil, Mary Elizabeth et al. Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, Volume 18, Issue 4, 281 - 287

  2. Gold, Barry S., et al. “Bites of Venomous Snakes.” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 347, no. 5, 1 Aug. 2002, pp. 347–356., doi:10.1056/nejmra013477.

  3. Seifert, Steven A., et al. “AAPCC Database Characterization of Native U.S. Venomous Snake Exposures, 2001–2005.” Clinical Toxicology, vol. 47, no. 4, 2009, pp. 327–335., doi:10.1080/15563650902870277.

  4. “Venomous snakes distribution and species risk categories.” World Health Organization. 2010. http://apps.who.int/bloodproducts/snakeantivenoms/database/

  5. Cardwell, Michael D. “Recognizing Dangerous Snakes in the United States and Canada: A Novel 3-Step Identification Method.” Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, vol. 22, no. 4, 1 Oct. 2011, pp. 304–308., doi:10.1016/j.wem.2011.07.001.

  6. Prophylactic Antibiotics Are Not Needed Following Rattlesnake Bites. August, Jessica A. et al. The American Journal of Medicine, Volume 131, Issue 11, 1367 - 1371

  7. Recurrence phenomena after immunoglobulin therapy for snake envenomations: Part 2. Guidelines for clinical management with crotaline Fab antivenom. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 2001, Vol.37(2), p.196-201., doi: 10.1067/mem.2001.113134

  8. Hall, Edward L. “Role of Surgical Intervention in the Management of Crotaline Snake Envenomation.” Annals of Emergency Medicine, vol. 37, no. 2, Feb. 2001, pp. 175–180., doi:10.1067/mem.2001.113373.

add tags

schedule post

share to twitter u%

format other posts you may enjoy

fix URL and copy to google file

Posted on October 26, 2020 and filed under Toxicology.

Vaporizing Lung Injury

Written by:&nbsp;Aaron Wibberley, MD (NUEM ‘22)&nbsp;Edited by:&nbsp;Matt McCauley, MD (NUEM ‘21)&nbsp;Expert Commentary by: Leon Gussow, MD

Written by: Aaron Wibberley, MD (NUEM ‘22) Edited by: Matt McCauley, MD (NUEM ‘21) Expert Commentary by: Leon Gussow, MD


Vaporizor Lung Injury Blog FINAL Post.jpg

Initial post


Expert Commentary

Although the large cluster of EVALI cases seen last summer and fall has subsided, the known and potential pulmonary problems associated with vaping nicotine or THC products remain an important topic for emergency practitioners and medical toxicologists alike. In a recent update on EVALI, the CDC reported that as of February 18, 2020 a total of 2807 cases had been documented from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Among these cases were 68 fatalities. [1]

As this instructive post by Drs. Wibberley and McCauley suggests, many vaping liquids available at retail outlets or on the street are largely unregulated and may contain a witch’s brew of additives and contaminants whose effects on the human respiratory system have not been adequately studied. In addition to glycerin, propylene glycol, and various flavorings, inhaled vapor from these products may also contain toxic metals, formaldehyde, nitrosamines, and acrolein. [2]

One additive strongly linked to EVALI is vitamin E acetate, a synthetic oil used commercially in skin creams, dietary supplements, and multivitamins. Vitamin E acetate has been detected in many non-commercial illicit THC vaping cartridges used by EVALI patients, where it might have been added as a thickener.  It was also found in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid drawn from 48 of 51 (94%) confirmed or probable cases of EVALI, but in no such samples from 99 healthy controls. [3,4] Vitamin E acetate may impair the function of pulmonary surfactant. Despite this strong link, the CDC concluded that “evidence is not sufficient to rule out the contribution of other chemicals of concern.’ [5]

As noted in the post, since EVALI is a diagnosis of exclusion, initial clinical efforts should focus on supportive care and ruling-out other potential causes, especially pulmonary infections. Suspecting the diagnosis and establishing a connection to vaping is particularly challenging during flu season or large outbreaks of other respiratory infections. But if EVALI is not considered, a relatively stable patient with early disease may be sent home only to resume vaping. That could lead to disaster. Although new cases of EVALI have not been reported in the last several months, here’s what I think is good practice: any patient with new respiratory complaints should be asked about vaping. If they partake, they should be advised that the practice may be exacerbating their symptoms and counseled to abstain.

References

  1. Outbreak of Lung Injury Associated with E-cigarette Use, or Vaping. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/severe-lung-disease.html#latest-information. Accessed May 10, 2020.

  2. Ind PW. E-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury. Br J Hosp Med. 2020 Apr;81(4):1-9.

  3. Sun LH. Contaminant found in marijuana vaping products linked to deadly lung illnesses, tests show. Washington Post Sept 6, 2019.

  4. Blount BC et al. Vitamin E Acetate in Bronchoalveolar-Lavage Fluid Associated with EVALI. N Engl J Med 2020;382:697-705.

  5. Ghinai I et al. Characteristics of Persons Who Report Using Only Nicotine-Containing Products Among Interviewed Patients with E-cigarette, or Vaping, Product Use-Associated Lung Injury — Illinois, August-December 2019. MMWR 2020 Jan 24;69(3):84-89.

Leon Gussow.PNG

Dr. Leon Gussow, MD

Assistant Professor of Emergency Medicine, Rush University

Consultant for Illinois Poison Center

Medical Editor, The Poison Review


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Wibberley, A. McCauley, M. (2020, Sept 28). Vaporizing Lung Injury. [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Gussow, L]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/vaporizing-lung-injury


Other Posts You May Enjoy

Posted on September 28, 2020 and filed under Toxicology.

Lipid Emulsion Therapy for Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity

Written by:&nbsp;Dana Loke, MD (NUEM ‘20)&nbsp;Edited by:&nbsp;Jim Kenny, MD (NUEM ‘18)&nbsp;Expert Commentary by: Patrick Lank, MD, MS

Written by: Dana Loke, MD (NUEM ‘20) Edited by: Jim Kenny, MD (NUEM ‘18) Expert Commentary by: Patrick Lank, MD, MS


Local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) is a feared complication of local anesthetic use. Current estimates of LAST toxicity in adults range from 7.5 to 20 per 10,000 peripheral nerve blocks and 4 per 10,000 epidurals.[1] Although rare, this complication can be fatal. Unfortunately, many physicians are unaware of the toxic dose of local anesthetics and are unable to recognize the signs and symptoms of this toxicity.[2] For this reason and the fact that local anesthetic toxicity is rare, by the time this syndrome is identified, patients are often in cardiac arrest or peri-arrest. Thankfully, lipid emulsion such as Intralipid is a safe and effective therapy used to treat LAST.

 How does lipid emulsion therapy work?

Lipid emulsion therapy is an intravenous therapy that binds lipophilic toxins and therefore reverses their toxicity. There are several brand name lipid emulsion therapies, however Intralipid, a soy-based lipid emulsion that contains long-chain triglycerides, is the most commonly used (Figure 1).[3] The ability of lipid emulsion therapy to counteract the toxic effects of local anesthetics was discovered in 1998 by Weinberg et al when it was incidentally found that lab rats pre-treated with an infusion of lipids could withstand larger doses of bupivacaine before arresting.[4] The rats were also more easily resuscitated if given lipid emulsion therapy.[1]  These findings were subsequently confirmed in other laboratories and clinical systemic analyses.[5] Once studied more directly, it was found that intralipid acts as a “sink” by creating a lipid compartment within the plasma that attracts lipophilic compounds, such as local anesthetics, into the lipid sink, which is separate from the aqueous phase of the plasma.[1]

Figure 1: Composition of Various Brands of Lipid Emulsions[1]

Figure 1: Composition of Various Brands of Lipid Emulsions[1]

How does LAST manifest?

Toxicity is a rare but potentially lethal side effect of local anesthetic. However, since patients often present without any knowledge that they were administered toxic doses of local anesthetic, it is important that the EM physician be cognizant of the signs of this toxicity. Symptoms typically start after a toxic dose of local anesthetic is administered or if local anesthetic is inadvertently administered directly into a vessel instead of subcutaneously (Figure 2). Onset of LAST is typically 30 seconds to 60 minutes after administration of the anesthetic but more often than not occurs within 1-5 minutes.[6]

Figure 2: Maximum Doses and Durations of Various Local Anesthetics[9]

Figure 2: Maximum Doses and Durations of Various Local Anesthetics[9]

Symptoms of LAST can vary, however there are 5 general ways in which LAST presents.[6] One or all of these manifestations may be present.

  • CNS (excitement) – an early manifestation of LAST that often begins with confusion or slurred speech but may include subjective symptoms like metallic taste in the mouth, tinnitus, oral numbness, dizziness, lightheadedness, or visual or auditory disturbances. If not treated promptly, these symptoms often progress to seizures, syncope, coma, respiratory depression, or cardiovascular collapse.

  • Cardiovascular – often preceded by CNS symptoms but not always. May include hypertension, tachycardia or bradycardia, arrhythmias, and asystole. Depressed contractility of the heart then leads to progressive hypotension and ultimately cardiac arrest.

  • Hematologic – methemoglobinemia, cyanosis

  • Allergic – urticaria, rash, and rarely anaphylaxis

  • Local tissue response – numbness, paresthesia

The EM physician should maintain a high level of suspicion should a patient present after a same day surgery or procedure with any constellation of these symptoms.

How is lipid emulsion therapy administered?

Once LAST is recognized, the EM physician should immediately consider giving lipid emulsion therapy. An initial dose of 20% lipid emulsion at 1.5 ml/kg or a 100 ml bolus can be administered over a few minutes. This can be repeated after 5 minutes for 2 or more times for persistent hemodynamic instability. The bolus(es) should immediately be followed by a continuous infusion at 0.25-0.5 ml/kg/min.[3] The infusion should run for a minimum of 10 minutes after return of hemodynamic stability, however there are documented reports of recurrent systemic toxicity even after this. For this reason, patients should be admitted for at least 12 hours for observation and additional doses of intralipid as needed for rebound symptoms or hemodynamic compromise.[3] Consultation with your facility’s poison center is also crucial to further guide management.

Efficacy

In terms of efficacy, case reports and systemic analyses have found that lipid emulsion therapy:

  • Can reverse both neurologic and cardiac toxicity [5]

  • Leads to significantly higher rates of ROSC compared to saline controls in animal models [5]

  • Is more effective for witnessed events (for example, brief down time for patients that arrest)5

  • Is often effective in patients in which epinephrine, vasopressin, and antiarrhythmic medications did not work

Both hypoxia and acidosis worsen the toxicity of local anesthetics and may inhibit lipid emulsion therapy, so it is imperative that oxygenation and acid-base status are optimized when lipid emulsion therapy is needed.[3, 5]

 Contraindications, Complications, and Special Populations

There are no absolute contraindications to intravenous lipid emulsion therapy and no clinically significant complications documented in the literature. The benefits of lipid emulsion therapy will often outweigh any potential risks in patients with LAST, especially if hemodynamically unstable or coding.

Potential complications of lipid emulsion therapy are mainly related to hypersensitivity. Patients allergic to soybean protein or eggs theoretically may develop allergic or anaphylactic reactions. These reactions should be treated like all other allergic or anaphylactic reactions: with anti-histamines, steroids, and epinephrine as needed. Additionally, there are reported cases of hyperamylasemia however no documented progression to clinical pancreatitis.[3] There are also case reports of extreme lipemia, however even a patient that was inadvertently given 2 L of 20% lipid emulsion did not develop any cardiopulmonary complications.[5] The lipemia however did interfere with standard laboratory tests.[5]

Intralipid is safe in pregnancy and has documented use for treating LAST in term pregnancy.[7] Furthermore, it has documented uncomplicated use in pediatric and neonatal patients.[3, 8]

 Key Points

  • Systemic toxicity is a rare but potentially fatal complication of local anesthetic use.

  • Lipid emulsion therapy such as Intralipid mitigates the toxic effects of local anesthetics and can reverse both neurologic and cardiac toxicity.

  • LAST may manifest initially with CNS symptoms but can progress to seizure, respiratory depression, coma, and cardiovascular collapse.

  • An initial bolus of 1.5 ml/kg or 100 ml 20% lipid emulsion followed by an infusion starting at 0.25 ml/kg/min is crucial to reverse toxicity and prevent recurrence.

  • Hypoxia and acidosis both worsen LAST and may inhibit lipid emulsion therapy.

  • Patients should be admitted in order to monitor for recurrent toxicity.

  • There are no contraindications to and minimal side effects of lipid emulsion therapy.


Expert Commentary

Thank you both for the above thorough review of local anesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) from the emergency physician perspective! I only want to add a few points to consider when learning more about LAST.

Without going into too much detail, there has been a lot of research done to figure out exactly how lipids aide in the treatment of patients with severe LAST. The lipid sink model is wonderfully understandable and explains many of the clinical and laboratory we see (e.g., a greater decrease in free serum concentration of more lipophilic local anesthetics).  However, there are some other models and theories to be aware of. One I am fascinated by is the “lipid shuttle.” Fundamentally, this describes the phenomenon that lipid therapy will decrease the concentration of local anesthetic at sites of toxicity (i.e., heart and CNS) and increase its concentration in the liver. So instead of lipids acting only as a “sink” to remove a toxin from free availability, it is helping mobilize the toxin to an area where it can go through the process of elimination from the body. Additionally, there are wonderful biochemical explanations (e.g., fatty acid supply, inhibition of nitric oxide release, reversal of mitochondrial dysfunction) to the positive cardiovascular effects seen after lipid treatment in LAST. All of these explanations, it seems, combine to contribute to the hemodynamic response seen in LAST.

Second, I would like to point your readers towards a resource that may help them work through the mechanics of administering lipid rescue therapy in LAST – lipidrescue.org. On that website, one can find links to various protocols, compilations of prior research done on the topic, and much more background on the science of the treatment than I provided above.

Third, in the emergency department, I think you are correct in saying that the most likely source of LAST we would see would come from outpatient surgery centers. A few other clinical scenarios to be aware of would include the following: ingestion of local anesthetics – mostly benzonatate (Tessalon); non-surgical outpatient aesthetic offices that may use topical anesthetics; inappropriate and excessive home use of local anesthetics for pain relief.

Finally, a very brief comment on the use of lipid rescue therapy in non-LAST toxic exposures although that was not the subject of your post. While lipid rescue therapy for LAST has a remarkable record of being effective, that is not yet the case with its use in other toxic exposures. A list of the side effects of lipid rescue therapy includes but is not limited to ARDS, pancreatitis, infection, and significant laboratory interference. While in the setting of severe LAST, the risk: benefit often favors administering lipid rescue, this may not be the case in the setting of non-LAST exposures.  For those non-LAST cases (as well as with LAST cases) in which you are wondering if lipid rescue would be appropriate, I would strongly recommend you call your regional poison center to discuss further focused therapy. 

Patrick_Lank-04 (1).jpg

Patrick Lank, MD, MS

Assistant Professor of Emergency Medicine

Medical Toxicologist

Department of Emergency Medicine


How To Cite This Post:

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication] Loke D, Kenny J. (2020, July 20). Lipid Emulsion Therapy for Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity. Expert Commentary by Lank P. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/lipid-emulsion-therapy


Other Posts You May Enjoy


References

1.     Manavi, M. (201). Lipid infusion as a treatment for local anesthetic toxicity: a literature review. AANA Journal, 78(1), 69-78.

2.     Cooper, B.R., Moll, T., & Griffiths, J.R. (2010) Local anaesthetic toxicity: are we prepared for the consequences in the Emergency Department. J Emerg Med, 27(8), 599.

3.     Mercado, P. & Weinberg, G.L. (2011). Local anesthetic systemic toxicity: prevention and treatment. Anesthesiology Clin, 29(2), 233-242.

4.     Weinberg, G.L., VadeBancouer, T., Ramarju, G.A., Garcia-Amaro, M.F., & Cwik, M.J. (1998). Pretreatment or resuscitation with a lipid infusion shifts the dose-response to bupivacaine-induced asystole in rats. Anesthesiology, 88(4), 1071-5.

5.     Weinberg, G.L. (2012). Lipid emulsion infusion: resuscitation for local anesthetic and other drug overdose. Anesthesiology, 117(1), 180-7.

6.     Wadlund, D. (2017). Local anesthetic systemic toxicity. ARON Journal, 106(5), 367-77.

7.     Dun-Chi Lin, J., Sivanesan, E., Horlocker, T.T., & Missair, A. (2017). Two for one: a case report of intravenous lipid emulsion to treat local anesthetic systemic toxicity in term pregnancy. A&A Case Reports, 8(9), 235-7.

8.     Shah, S., Gopalakrishnan, S., Apuya, J., Shah, S., & Martin, T. (2009). Use of intralipid in an infant with impending cardiovascular collapse due to local anesthetic toxicity. J Anesth, 23(3), 439-441.

9. “Missouri Society of Health-System Pharmacists - Overview of Management of Local Anesthetic Systemic Toxicity (LAST) Based on Updated 2017/18 ASRA Practice Guidelines.”

Posted on July 20, 2020 and filed under Toxicology.

Toxic Flames

Screen Shot 2018-08-08 at 9.57.05 PM.png

Written by:  Vidya Eswaran, MD (NUEM PGY-3) Edited by:  Jonathan Andereck, MD (NUEM PGY-4) Expert commentary by: Matt Zuckerman, MD (University of Colorado)



Expert Commentary

Thank you, this highlights an important aspect of treating victims of smoke inhalation.

In terms of the physiology of CO I like to think of it as an acquired hemoglobinopathy at low doses, thus patients with premorbid cardiopulmonary disease may be affected at lower doses. A fair amount has been written about how absolute levels correlate poorly with clinical effects. The idea of levels correlating to symptoms seem to originate from a Bureau of Mines publication from 1923 that won’t disappear. I would suggest having a low threshold for testing anyone who might have exposure; the failure for CO is in not testing.

Additionally, cherry lips are rarely found in living patients (more commonly on autopsy event at levels below 50%) so are rarely clinically useful (J Forensic Sci. 1995 Jul;40(4):596-8).

The “consider” HBO recommendation for COHb levels >25% is very controversial and the literature is limited by heterogeneity in patients and treatment protocols. Some would argue against hyperbaric for most patients or even consider HBO for patients at lower levels. Consultation with toxicologists and hyperbaricists is likely to be helpful.

Lactic acidosis is key to cyanide poisoning. Most use a combination of smoke exposure with an elevated lactate (>10 mmol/L) to be highly suggestive of CN toxicity and an indication for empiric treatment. CN levels are rarely helpful and rarely ordered. The description of cyanide symptoms “progressing” is a bit of a misnomer as cyanide is initially rapid onset, without evolving symptoms; indeed knockdown is a common presenting symptom. Hydroxocobalamin is preferred to the antidote kit, and amyl nitrate is omitted if sodium nitrite is given. The transient hypertension associated with hydroxocobalamin is often therapeutic given the incidence of hypotension, and its important to be aware that this will discolor serum and tears and urine.

Picture1.png
 

Matthew Zuckerman, MD

Assistant Professor of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine


How to cite this post

[Peer-Reviewed, Web Publication]   Eswaran V, Andereck J (2018, August 20). Toxic Flames.  [NUEM Blog. Expert Commentary by Zuckerman M]. Retrieved from http://www.nuemblog.com/blog/toxic-flames


Posts you may also enjoy

Posted on August 20, 2018 and filed under Toxicology.

Methadone Induced Torsades

Torsades de Pointes (Tdp) is a term that is often used synonymously with polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PVT) but it is important to understand the differences. This week we take a deep dive into an interesting case of Tdp with expert commentary by Amal Mattu!