Successful Treatment of Confirmed Severe Bupropion Cardiotoxicity With Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Initiation Prior to Cardiac Arrest.

Bupropion is a substituted cathinone (ß-keto amphetamine) norepinephrine/dopamine reuptake inhibitor andnoncompetitive nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist that is frequently used to treat major depressive disorder. Bupropion overdose can cause neurotoxicity and cardiotoxicity, the latter of which is thought to be secondary to gap junction inhibition and ion channel blockade. We report a patient with a confirmed bupropion ingestion causing severe cardiotoxicity, for whom prophylactic veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) was successfully implemented. The patient was placed on the ECMO circuit several hours before he experienced multiple episodes of hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia, which were treated with multiple rounds of electrical defibrillation and terminated after administration of lidocaine. Despite a neurological examination notable for fixed and dilated pupils after ECMO cannulation, the patient completely recovered without neurological deficits. Multiple bupropion and hydroxybupropion concentrations were obtained and appear to correlate with electrocardiogram interval widening and toxicity.

Minding the osmol gap: a sentinel event and subsequent laboratory investigation.

INTRODUCTION: Many hospitals are unable to determine toxic alcohol concentrations in a clinically meaningful time frame. Thus, clinicians use surrogate markers when evaluating potentially poisoned patients. INDEX CASE: A patient presented after an intentional antifreeze (ethylene glycol) ingestion with an osmol gap of -10.6 that remained stable one hour later. Further investigation revealed that the serum osmolality was calculated and not measured. The true osmol gap was 16.4, which correlated to a measured ethylene glycol concentration of 808 mg/L (80.8 mg/dL, 13.0 mmol/L). SURVEY: A telephone survey of hospital laboratories in our catchment area was performed to investigate the potential for similar events. RESULTS: Thirty-eight (47 percent) hospitals responded. No laboratories were able to test for toxic alcohols. One hospital (2.6 percent) reported routinely calculating osmolality based on chemistries, while two hospitals (5.3 percent) reported scenarios in which this might occur. Thirty-five (92.1 percent) hospitals could directly measure osmolality. Two hospitals (5.3 percent) were reliant on outside laboratories for osmolality measurement. LIMITATIONS: The 47 percent response rate and one geographic area are significant limitations. DISCUSSION: Over 10 percent of hospitals that responded could have significant difficulty assessing patients with toxic alcohol ingestion. CONCLUSIONS: Until the standard of rapidly obtaining toxic alcohol concentrations is broadly implemented, we recommend that policies and procedures be put in place to minimize errors associated with the determination of the osmol gap.