[Six-year review of cigarette ingestion in children--gastric lavage versus medical observation].

During 2006, the Japan Poison Information Center received 2583 inquiries about ingestion of cigarette, which is the most frequent household products ingested by children in Japan. During 2001-2006, two hundred and seventy-six children under seven years of age ingesting cigarettes and its related substances presented to the emergency department in Japan Red Cross Hospital Wakayama Center. The peak age was one year and younger, so-called "ingestion age". Patients were frequently detected chewing cigarettes and the situation of cases varied individually. It was impossible to estimate the amount of ingested cigarette based on the medical interview. Eighty-three percent of the patients were asymptomatic. Treatment strategy has been changed into a noninvasive one. Gastric lavage has not been performed by emergency physicians since 2001, and by pediatricians since 2006. After the medical observation for two hours following ingestion, all the children except one (who was hospitalized because of his family's request) were discharged from the emergency department. Independent of doing gastric lavage, all the 276 children had good prognosis. We conluded that ingestion of cigarette in children is generally benign. No gastric lavage, but medical observation for two hours following ingestion in emergency department is our recommendation of management.

Differences in treatment advice for common poisons by poisons centres--an international comparison.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how poisons centres advise on management of common drug poisonings and compare advice on gut decontamination with the EAPCCT/AACT Position Statements. METHODS: An interactive questionnaire was sent to 14 poisons centres asking about working practices, "top 20" enquiries in 2002, and management of 4 specific drug poisonings. RESULTS: Replies were received from centres in 11 countries. Annual telephone enquiry numbers varied from 620 (Sri Lanka) to over 50,000 (Germany for 2000). Recommendations for gut decontamination for acetaminophen poisoning were: activated charcoal (AC) alone (5 centres); gastric lavage (GL) alone (1); AC and/or GL (3); AC, GL and/or ipecac (2). Only 40% (4/10) recommended AC and 50% (3/6) GL within 1 hour. Intervention doses for gut decontamination ranged from 100-200 mg/kg (nine centres) and for "high-risk" groups 75-100 mg/kg (3). Plasma concentration for N-acetylcysteine (NAC) treatment ranged from 150 mg/L (four centres) to 200 mg/L (6) at 4 hours. Results were similarly varied for three other common drug poisons (benzodiazepines, amitriptyline, and paroxetine). CONCLUSIONS: Most poisons centres have protocols that differ in terms of gut decontamination, timing, and intervention doses. Many centres recommend charcoal or gastric lavage after the 1-hour limit proposed in the Position Statements. There is scope for rationalization of approaches to the management of common poisons.

Is syrup of ipecac still for sale? Comparison of pharmacies in a large urban area--2003 versus 2005.

There has been considerable publicity about the lack of benefit and potential dangers of syrup of ipecac. In November 2003, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended against its use. Pharmacies in Houston, Texas were surveyed by telephone before (survey 1) and after (survey 2) the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendation to determine whether ipecac availability changed. There were 126 pharmacies interviewed at survey 1, and 128 interviewed at survey 2. Pharmacies in survey 1 were more likely than those in survey 2 to sell ipecac (79% versus 64%, P < .01) and to have it in stock (75% versus 48%, P < .001). Pharmacies mostly stored ipecac on the shelves (67%, survey 1; 59%, survey 2, P = .27). Although syrup of ipecac availability has declined significantly, it is still available in more than 50% of pharmacies. Health care providers should advise against its use and advocate that pharmacies remove it.

International Variability in Gastrointestinal Decontamination With Acute Poisonings.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Identifying international differences in the management of acute pediatric poisonings may help improve the quality of care. The objective of this study was to assess the international variation and appropriateness of gastrointestinal decontamination (GID) procedures performed in children and adolescents who present with acute poisonings to emergency departments. METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, cross-sectional prospective study including children <18 years with poisoning exposures presenting to 105 emergency departments in 20 countries from 8 global regions belonging to the Pediatric Emergency Research Networks. Data collection started between January and September 2013 and continued for 1 year. The appropriateness of GID procedures performed was analyzed using the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology and the European Association of Poisons Centres and Clinical Toxicologists' recommendations. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors for performing GID procedures. RESULTS: We included 1688 patients, 338 of whom (20.0%, 95% confidence interval 18.1%-22.0%) underwent the following GID procedures: activated charcoal (166, 49.1%), activated charcoal and gastric lavage (122, 36.1%), gastric lavage (47, 13.9%), and ipecac (3, 0.9%). In 155 (45.8%, 40.5%-51.2%), the GID procedure was considered appropriate, with significant differences between regions. Independent risk factors for GID procedures included age, toxin category, mechanism of poisoning, absence of symptoms, and the region where the intoxication occurred (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Globally, there are substantial differences in the use and appropriateness of GID procedures in the management of pediatric poisonings. International best practices need to be better implemented.

Gastrointestinal decontamination.

Overall, no conclusive data support the use of gastric decontamination in the routine management of the poisoned patient. Studies of asymptomatic patients suggest that no treatment is required, and, given the complications that have been reported, this may be a reasonable approach to' most patients. Even in symptomatic patients, the only demonstrable benefit was found in a post-hoc subgroup analysis and involved an outcome of questionable clinical importance. Given these data, it would be easy to conclude that GI decontamination has no role in the management of the poisoned patient. This conclusion is valid when considering poisoned patients as a group, but all poisoned patients are not the same. Patients with trivial ingestion do well without treatment, and their greatest risk is an iatrogenic complication. Even patients with more serious ingestions usually have good outcomes with supportive care alone. It is no longer sufficient to justify GL or forced administration of AC with the supposition that "the patient could have taken something bad." However,there are some overdoses where limiting the systemic absorption of the poison may limit the toxic effects and prevent serious toxicity. After careful consideration of the risks, GI decontamination should be targeted at patients who, in the opinion of the treating physician, have a potentially life-threatening exposure.

Efficacy of ipecac and activated charcoal/cathartic. Prevention of salicylate absorption in a simulated overdose.

Twelve adult volunteers were given 24 81-mg aspirin tablets and were randomly assigned into the following treatment groups: (1) control aspirin, (2) 30 mL of ipecac repeated if vomiting not induced, (3) 60 g of activated charcoal per 15 g of magnesium sulfate (MgSO4), and (4) ipecac repeated if needed, followed by activated charcoal/MgSO4 given 1 1/2 hours after the last vomiting episode. All treatments began 60 minutes following aspirin ingestion. Urine was collected for 48 hours for percent total salicylate excretion. Mean +/- SD recovery of salicylate from urine was as follows: aspirin, 96.3% +/- 7.5%; ipecac 70.3% +/- 11.8%, activated charcoal/MgSO4, 56.4% +/- 12%; and ipecac and activated charcoal/MgSO4, 72.4% +/- 14.1%. Ten subjects completed the study. In group 4, eight of ten subjects vomited the activated charcoal/MgSO4 immediately, making statistical analysis impossible. Analysis revealed that activated charcoal/MgSO4 significantly lowered the absorption of aspirin compared with the control and ipecac-treated groups. Furthermore, ipecac significantly lowered aspirin absorption compared with the control group. We conclude that activated charcoal/MgSO4 used alone is superior to the other treatment modalities at inhibiting the absorption of multiple aspirin tablets.

Guideline on the use of ipecac syrup in the out-of-hospital management of ingested poisons.

The use of gastric emptying techniques, including ipecac-induced emesis, in the management of poisoned patients has declined significantly in recent years. Historically, poison centers used ipecac syrup in two ways. Ipecac syrup was administered to patients prior to referral to the emergency department in attempts to start the gastric emptying process as early as possible. Additionally, poison centers used ipecac syrup in attempts to keep patients from requiring referral to medical facilities. In these situations, ipecac syrup was administered in the home and poison center staff performed follow-up telephone calls to gauge progress and outcome. Studies to determine the effectiveness of ipecac syrup demonstrate that it induces vomiting in a high percentage of people to whom it is administered and that it decreases the gastrointestinal absorption of ingested substances in a time-dependent fashion. However, the effectiveness of ipecac syrup in affecting patient outcome has not been studied in adequate clinical trials. Its effectiveness in preventing drug absorption has only been documented for a limited number of substances and is substantially reduced if it is given more than 30-90 minutes following ingestion of the toxic material. There are potentially significant contraindications, adverse effects and related problems associated with the use of ipecac syrup. It is the consensus of the panel that the circumstances in which ipecac-induced emesis is the appropriate or desired method of gastric decontamination are rare. The panel concluded that the use of ipecac syrup might have an acceptable benefit-to-risk ratio in rare situations in which: there is no contraindication to the use of ipecac syrup; and there is substantial risk of serious toxicity to the victim; and there is no alternative therapy available or effective to decrease gastrointestinal absorption (e.g., activated charcoal); and there will be a delay of greater than 1 hour before the patient will arrive at an emergency medical facility and ipecac syrup can be administered within 30-90 minutes of the ingestion; and ipecac syrup administration will not adversely affect more definitive treatment that might be provided at a hospital. In such circumstances, the administration of ipecac syrup should occur only in response to a specific recommendation from a poison center, emergency department physician, or other qualified medical personnel. The panel decided not to address the issue of whether ipecac should remain a nonprescription, over-the-counter product. The panel does not support the routine stocking of ipecac in all households with young children but was unable to reach consensus on which households with young children might benefit from stocking ipecac. Instead, the panel concluded that individual practitioners and poison control centers are best able to determine the particular patient population, geographic and other variables that might influence the decision to recommend having ipecac on hand.

Expired ipecac syrup efficacy.

A controlled prospective study to evaluate the efficacy of expired ipecac syrup was conducted at two regional poison control centers in New England. During a 6-month period, 200 study patients treated with expired ipecac syrup and 200 control patients treated with unexpired ipecac syrup were evaluated. There were no statistical differences between the control and study groups in patient characteristics (age and sex) and product characteristics (general class, emetic potential, pretreatment, previously opened bottles, and manufacturer). In both control and study groups, emesis occurred in 100% of cases with 90% of patients vomiting with the first dose. The mean time to emesis was 24.7 minutes and 24.8 minutes in the study and control groups, respectively. Expired preparations ranged from 1 month to greater than 4 years postexpiration, with the duration of expiration not altering the mean time to emesis. Mean time to emesis between the two groups was also not affected by manufacturer, pretreatment with milk, or whether the ipecac syrup bottle was previously opened. We conclude that expired ipecac syrup (up to 4 years postexpiration date) is an effective emetic.

Effect of zatosetron on ipecac-induced emesis in dogs and healthy men.

Serotonin receptor (5-HT3) antagonists provide effective antiemetic therapy in cancer patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy, such as cisplatin. Animal studies have shown that 5-HT3 receptor antagonists also have antiemetic activity in ipecac-induced emesis. The authors investigated the antiemetic activity of zatosetron maleate, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, on ipecac-induced emesis in dogs and healthy men. They also evaluated the effect of ipecac administration on serotonin release and metabolism by measuring urinary 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) excretion in healthy men. In separate randomized, placebo-controlled trials, 20 dogs received zatosetron intravenously and eight healthy men received zatosetron (50 mg) orally, followed by ipecac syrup. In both trials, emetic response to ipecac was recorded, including the number and time of vomits and retches. Zatosetron treatment inhibited and delayed ipecac-induced emesis in both groups. In dogs, zatosetron inhibited ipecac-induced emesis in a dose-dependent manner with a 100-micrograms/kg dose producing complete inhibition. In men, zatosetron administration resulted in fewer emetic episodes after ipecac than had occurred with placebo administration (P = .03); vomiting was completely inhibited by zatosetron. In men, ipecac administration did not affect the urinary 5-HIAA/creatinine ratio (mg/g) or 5-HIAA excretion rate (microgram/hour). Our study demonstrates that zatosetron has similar efficacy on ipecac-induced emesis in healthy men, as has been shown previously with other 5-HT3 receptor antagonists in chemotherapy-induced emesis in cancer patients. We did not observe the increase of urinary 5-HIAA in our study with ipecac-induced emesis, however, as has been described previously in cisplatin-induced emesis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Advances in clinical toxicology.

New data are reviewed in two areas in the management of the acute overdose: gastrointestinal decontamination and systemic antidotes. The mechanism and effectiveness of Ipecac syrup, gastric aspiration and lavage, activated charcoal, gastrointestinal dialysis, and saline cathartics are discussed. Special problems posed by disc batteries and packet ingestion of cocaine (in transporting contraband) are highlighted. The pharmacology and uses of pyridoxine and naloxone as antidotes are detailed.

Rapidly reversible cardiomyopathy associated with chronic ipecac ingestion.

Ipecac, an over-the-counter emetic agent, has been a drug of choice for abuse by patients with eating disorders. Its alkaloid emetine has been associated with serious cardiac toxicity; however, the dose effect has not been well established. We present a patient with anorexia and bulimia nervosa who ingested ipecac chronically and developed the characteristic manifestations of ipecac toxicity. Unexpectedly, her induced left ventricular dysfunction returned to normal after only 10 days of withholding the drug. This finding, in contrast with the findings of other reports, establishes that ipecac cardiomyopathy can be readily reversible. The cumulative experience thus far, nonetheless, provides no discernible pattern of the effect of ipecac on the myocardium. Thus, in the continuum of poisoning, the point at which the myocardium becomes irreversibly damaged is undetermined. With continued abuse, potentially lethal outcome, and limited experience with ipecac cardiotoxicity, further investigation and perhaps heightened restriction of the drug are warranted.

The effectiveness of health education on home use of ipecac.

It is widely recommended by pediatricians that syrup of ipecac for secondary prevention of poisoning be kept in homes where there are young children. To evaluate the efficacy of this recommendation we measured mother's gain in knowledge of how to use ipecac safely at home. The study population (n = 78) were primarily middle class mothers bringing their 9-month-old infants to one pediatrician at a health maintenance organization for a well-baby visit. The pediatrician delivered health education on poisonings. A before-after study design was used. The highly significant (p less than 0.001) gain in knowledge demonstrates that parents can learn to use ipecac safely at home. The practitioner should limit safety counseling to selected areas most problematic at each age level, and within each topic, should concentrate on the most salient points.