Trends in Shortages of Lead Chelators From 2001 to 2022.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to describe drug shortages affecting lead chelators in the United States from 2001 through 2022. METHODS: Drug shortage data were retrieved from the University of Utah Drug Information Service from January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2022. Shortages of first- and second-line lead chelators were analyzed. Drug class, formulation, administration route, shortage reason, shortage duration, generic status, single-source status, and presence of temporally overlapping shortages were examined. Total shortage months, percentages of study period on shortage, and median shortage durations were calculated. RESULTS: Thirteen lead chelator shortages were reported during the study period. Median duration was 7.4 months and the longest shortage (24.8 months) involved calcium disodium edetate. Calcium disodium edetate and dimercaprol had the greatest number of shortages, 4 each, and 61.5% of shortages involved parenteral medications. Median shortage duration was 14.2 months for parenteral agents and 2.2 months for non-parenteral agents. All shortages involved generic, single-source products. Supply/demand and manufacturing problems were the most common shortage reasons provided. Overlapping shortages occurred for 3.7% of the study period. Median shortage duration increased from 3 to 11 months in the second half of the study period, and 61.5% of shortages occurred in the second half of the study period. CONCLUSIONS: All chelators experienced multiple shortages, which became increasingly frequent and prolonged over time. Concurrent shortages occurred, potentially hampering substitution between different agents. Health care stakeholders must build supply chain resilience and develop guidelines regarding how to modify chelation therapy based on shortage conditions.

Management patterns of multiple magnet ingestion reported to New Jersey Poison Information and Education System.

BACKGROUND: Ingestion of multiple high-powered neodymium rare-earth magnets poses a significant risk for gastrointestinal (GI) injury such as bowel perforation or ischemia. Given the rising incidence of rare earth magnetic ingestions and the corresponding increase in serious injuries in children, published guidelines recommend urgent endoscopic removal of all magnets within endoscopic reach in cases involving ingestions of two or more magnets. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do management patterns for multiple magnet ingestion align with current practice guidelines, and does hospital length of stay (LOS) differ based on the initial emergency department (ED) approach? METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of consecutive patient encounters reported to the New Jersey Poison Information and Education System (NJPIES) between January 2021 and April 2022 involving multiple magnet ingestion. Potential cases were retrieved from the NJPIES TOXICALL® database, using substance codes relating to magnet or foreign body ingestion. Two-sample T tests were used to determine the statistical difference in the hospital LOS between the group of patients receiving early emergent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) versus those receiving expectant management on initial presentation. RESULTS: There was a difference in the average LOS of 2.7 days (p = 0.023) longer in the expectant management group with no medical complications in either group. Twenty-five percent or 2 out of 8 cases deviated from guidelines. CONCLUSION: The initial ED decision to pursue expectant management instead of attempting emergent EGD removal of magnets may result in prolonged hospitalization, increased risk for readmission, and delayed definitive removal of magnets due to nonprogression along the GI tract.

Identification of a novel opioid, N-piperidinyl etonitazene (etonitazepipne), in patients with suspected opioid overdose.

BACKGROUND: Novel opioids in the illicit drug supply, such as the "nitazene" group of synthetic opioids, present an ongoing public health problem due to high potency and respiratory depressant effects. We describe three patients in whom N-piperidinyl etonitazene, a compound not previously reported in human exposure, was detected after suspected opioid overdose. Other substances that these patients tested for included fentanyl, cocaine, levamisole, phenacetin, benzoylecgonine, para-fluorofentanyl, presumptive heroin (tested as 6-monoacetylmorphine (6-MAM), morphine, and codeine), and tramadol. METHODS: This is a case series of patients with acute opioid overdose enrolled in an ongoing multicenter prospective cohort study. Data collected included reported substance use, clinical course, naloxone dose and response, outcome, and analytes detected in biological samples. RESULTS: Between October 6, 2020 and October 31, 2021, 1006 patients were screened and 412 met inclusion criteria. Of these, three patients (age 33-55) tested positive for N-piperidinyl etonitazene at one site in New Jersey over a period of three days in July 2021. Two patients reported the use of cocaine; one reported the use of heroin and alprazolam. All three patients received naloxone with improvement in their mental status (2 milligrams (mg) intranasally (IN); 8 mg IN; 0.08 mg intravenous (IV)). Two of three received subsequent doses for recurrence of opioid toxicity (0.4-0.6 mg IV). One patient was diagnosed with pneumonia and admitted to the intensive care unit, one was discharged from the Emergency Department (ED), and one used additional drug while in the ED and required admission for a naloxone infusion. None developed organ damage or sequelae. CONCLUSION: These cases represent a local outbreak of a novel "nitazene" opioid. Public health toxicosurveillance should incorporate routine testing of this emerging class of synthetic compounds in the illicit drug supply.

Found Down: Approach to the Patient with an Unknown Poisoning.

Approximately 30% of poison exposures reported to centers each year are either referred to or initiated within a health care facility. Among these exposures, undifferentiated poisoned patients are among the most challenging cases faced in the emergency department. Airway, breathing, circulation (ABCs) is central to the management of unknown poisoned patient. After initial stabilization, taking a systematic approach presented here may be beneficial to the clinician. This includes considering key additional history, a possible toxidrome, and data in the form of vital signs, physical examination, laboratory analysis, ECG, and imaging. After which a tailored approach to supportive care, decontamination, possible antidotes, and enhanced elimination techniques will improve outcomes.

Acute coronary syndrome and transient global amnesia with sumatriptan.

Triptans are potent serotoninergic vasoconstrictors. They are generally avoided in elderly patients age greater than 65 or in patients with a history of CAD. Although there are reported cases of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) or Transient Global Amnesia (TGA) in patients after ingesting therapeutic doses of triptan or dihydroergotamine, this is the first case report, up to our knowledge, of a patient, who had no previous cardiac history, that was diagnosed with both ACS and TGA. A 59-year-old woman with a long-standing history of migraine, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and hypothyroidism, presented to the Emergency Department (ED) complaining of amnesia, chest pain, and left arm numbness after ingesting a single dose of oral sumatriptan approximately 1-2 h prior to arrival. She had no recollection of the events that occurred after taking sumatriptan. No acute laboratory abnormalities were found except for an elevated troponin, which continued to trend upwards. Her EKG had no ST-T wave abnormalities. She was diagnosed with Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS), non-ST elevation MI. She had a negative noncontrast CT head. Neurology was consulted for her amnesia and diagnosed her with Transient Global Amnesia (TGA). They recommended discontinuing sumatriptan and beginning topiramate as a prophylactic therapy. There is an increasing number of reports delineating sumatriptan's adverse effects. Emergency medicine physicians should promptly recognize the toxic effects and adverse reactions from triptans. Sumatriptan-induced vasoconstriction may lead to cardiac and cerebral ischemic events.

Extracorporeal Treatment for Gabapentin and Pregabalin Poisoning: Systematic Review and Recommendations From the EXTRIP Workgroup.

Toxicity from gabapentin and pregabalin overdose is commonly encountered. Treatment is supportive, and the use of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) is controversial. The EXTRIP workgroup conducted systematic reviews of the literature and summarized findings following published methods. Thirty-three articles (30 patient reports and 3 pharmacokinetic studies) met the inclusion criteria. High gabapentinoid extracorporeal clearance (>150mL/min) and short elimination half-life (<5 hours) were reported with hemodialysis. The workgroup assessed gabapentin and pregabalin as "dialyzable" for patients with decreased kidney function (quality of the evidence grade as A and B, respectively). Limited clinical data were available (24 patients with gabapentin toxicity and 7 with pregabalin toxicity received ECTR). Severe toxicity, mortality, and sequelae were rare in cases receiving ECTR and in historical controls receiving standard care alone. No clear clinical benefit from ECTR could be identified although major knowledge gaps were acknowledged, as well as costs and harms of ECTR. The EXTRIP workgroup suggests against performing ECTR in addition to standard care rather than standard care alone (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence) for gabapentinoid poisoning in patients with normal kidney function. If decreased kidney function and coma requiring mechanical ventilation are present, the workgroup suggests performing ECTR in addition to standard care (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence).

The Poison Center as a pandemic response: establishment and characteristics of a COVID-19 hotline through the New Jersey Poison Center.

BACKGROUND: Poison Centers are uniquely positioned to respond to an unprecedented public health threat such as the COVID-19 pandemic, as fully operational 24-h hotlines already staffed with healthcare professionals. METHODS: On January 27, 2020 the New Jersey Poison Information and Education System (NJPIES) agreed to operate the New Jersey Coronavirus Hotline. Call patterns, subject matter, and staffing and infrastructure strategies that were implemented to meet the demand are described. In addition, a sample of 1500 individual calls were collected and analyzed in an endeavor to describe call times, call days, area from which the call originated, callers to the hotline, primary language of the caller, and why a call was placed to the hotline. Binomial regression analysis was utilized in an attempt to identify significant patterns. RESULTS: Since the inception of the hotline through October 31, NJPIES responded to 57,579 calls for COVID-19 information. Most calls (68.7%) were regarding testing for COVID-19 and for general questions/symptoms. Call types varied when they were analyzed by time of day with calls for general questions/symptoms and where to get tested for COVID-19 showing a significant association for the early morning hours, how to obtain test results being significantly associated with the afternoon hours, and how to renew or obtain a medical license showing a significant association to the evening hours. We additionally noted that specific call types became significant when analyzed on a week-to-week basis and as specific events, like the enactment of the CARES Act of 2020, occurred. CONCLUSION: Although not the traditional role of a regional Poison Control Center, pandemic response synergizes with the workflow of this hotline because the infrastructure, staffing, and healthcare expertise are already present. Poison centers can rapidly adapt through scaling and process change to meet the needs of the public during times of public health threats.

Synthetic Cannabinoid Exposure in Adolescents Presenting for Emergency Care.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize the clinical picture and management of synthetic cannabinoid exposure in a cohort of adolescents. METHODS: Using the 45 participating sites of the Toxicology Investigators Consortium Registry, a North American database, we conducted an observational study of a prospectively collected cohort. We identified all adolescent (12-19 years) cases of synthetic cannabinoid exposure who have received medical toxicology consultation between January 2012 and December 2016. Clinical and demographic data were collected including age, sex, circumstances surrounding exposure, coingestants, clinical manifestations, treatment, disposition, and outcome. RESULTS: We identified 75 adolescents who presented to the emergency department with synthetic cannabinoid exposure. Most were male (91%) and between the ages of 16 and 19 (66%). The most common symptoms were neuropsychiatric with 50 adolescents (67%) exhibiting central nervous system (CNS) manifestations. There was no predominant toxidrome, and 9 patients (12%) were mechanically ventilated. Mainstay of treatment was supportive care. No deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic cannabinoid exposure in adolescents is primarily characterized by CNS manifestations, which are varied and may be life-threatening. Frontline caregivers should maintain a high index of suspicion for synthetic cannabinoids, especially in adolescents who present with unexplained CNS manifestations, as there is no specific toxidrome or confirmatory rapid drug screen to detect them.