The Impact of Legalizing Recreational Cannabis on the Children of a Neighboring State.

OBJECTIVES: In the United States, cannabis is legal for adult recreational use in 24 states and Washington, DC. Unintentional pediatric cannabis exposures have increased in many states following legalization.We evaluated the relationship between recreational cannabis legalization and the rates of unintentional pediatric exposures in a neighboring state that had not undergone legalization. METHODS: We obtained cannabis exposure cases for children 0-12 years from the New Mexico Poison and Drug Information Center electronic database. Only deidentified patient data from closed-case exposure encounters were abstracted. Data were grouped as precommercial and postcommercial availability in neighboring Colorado, demarcated by January 2014. We coded cannabis products as edible, not edible, or unknown. For bivariable comparisons, we used odds ratios, risk ratio, χ2 test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test. We chose a type 1 error rate of 0.05 to determine significance. RESULTS: There were 269 exposures over 24 years of calls. Following neighboring legalization, the median number of exposures per year increased from 4 (interquartile range 2, 5) to 24.5 (16.5, 34), the median age increased from 1.9 to 3.0 (P = 0.007), and the relative risk of the exposure involving edible products was double (relative risk = 2.0, 95% confidence interval = 1.6, 2.6). The severity of the exposures' medical effects also increased (P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The number, severity, and type of pediatric cannabis exposures in New Mexico changed after neighboring recreational cannabis legalization. States neighboring those undergoing cannabis legalization should be prepared to respond to increased acute exposures in children.

Severe outcomes following pediatric cannabis intoxication: a prospective cohort study of an international toxicology surveillance registry.

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of jurisdictions have legalized recreational cannabis for adult use. The subsequent availability and marketing of recreational cannabis has led to a parallel increase in rates and severity of pediatric cannabis intoxications. We explored predictors of severe outcomes in pediatric patients who presented to the emergency department with cannabis intoxication. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we collected data on all pediatric patients (<18 years) who presented with cannabis intoxication from August 2017 through June 2020 to participating sites in the Toxicology Investigators Consortium. In cases that involved polysubstance exposure, patients were included if cannabis was a significant contributing agent. The primary outcome was a composite severe outcome endpoint, defined as an intensive care unit admission or in-hospital death. Covariates included relevant sociodemographic and exposure characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-eight pediatric patients (54% males, median age 14.0 years, interquartile range 3.7-16.0) presented to a participating emergency department with cannabis intoxication. Fifty-two patients (38%) were admitted to an intensive care unit, including one patient who died. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, polysubstance ingestion (adjusted odds ratio = 16.3; 95% confidence interval: 4.6-58.3; P < 0.001)) and cannabis edibles ingestion (adjusted odds ratio = 5.5; 95% confidence interval: 1.9-15.9; P = 0.001) were strong independent predictors of severe outcome. In an age-stratified regression analysis, in children older than >10 years, only polysubstance abuse remained an independent predictor for the severe outcome (adjusted odds ratio 37.1; 95% confidence interval: 6.2-221.2; P < 0.001). As all children 10 years and younger ingested edibles, a dedicated multivariable analysis could not be performed (unadjusted odds ratio 3.3; 95% confidence interval: 1.6-6.7). CONCLUSIONS: Severe outcomes occurred for different reasons and were largely associated with the patient's age. Young children, all of whom were exposed to edibles, were at higher risk of severe outcomes. Teenagers with severe outcomes were frequently involved in polysubstance exposure, while psychosocial factors may have played a role.

Predictors of severe outcome following opioid intoxication in children.

INTRODUCTION: While the opioid crisis has claimed the lives of nearly 500,000 in the U.S. over the past two decades, and pediatric cases of opioid intoxications are increasing, only sparse data exist regarding risk factors for severe outcome in children following an opioid intoxication. We explore predictors of severe outcome (i.e., intensive care unit [ICU] admission or in-hospital death) in children who presented to the Emergency Department with an opioid intoxication. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study we collected data on all children (0-18 years) who presented with an opioid intoxication to the 50 medical centers in the US and two international centers affiliated with the Toxicology Investigators Consortium (ToxIC) of the American College of Medical Toxicology, from August 2017 through June 2020, and who received a bedside consultation by a medical toxicologist. We collected relevant demographic, clinical, management, disposition, and outcome data, and we conducted a multivariable logistic regression analysis to explore predictors of severe outcome. The primary outcome was a composite severe outcome endpoint, defined as ICU admission or in-hospital death. Covariates included sociodemographic, exposure and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 165 (87 females, 52.7%) children with an opioid intoxication, 89 (53.9%) were admitted to ICU or died during hospitalization, and 76 did not meet these criteria. Seventy-four (44.8%) children were exposed to opioids prescribed to family members. Fentanyl exposure (adjusted OR [aOR] = 3.6, 95% CI: 1.0-11.6; p = 0.03) and age ≥10 years (aOR = 2.5, 95% CI: 1.2-4.8; p = 0.01) were independent predictors of severe outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Children with an opioid toxicity that have been exposed to fentanyl and those aged ≥10 years had 3.6 and 2.5 higher odds of ICU admission or death, respectively, than those without these characteristics. Prevention efforts should target these risk factors to mitigate poor outcomes in children with an opioid intoxication.

A systematic review of second line therapies in toxic seizures.

BACKGROUND: Seizures are a common manifestation of toxic exposures requiring immediate and possibly ongoing management. Guidelines recommend benzodiazepines as first-line therapy for toxic seizures; however, there is a paucity of literature regarding optimal secondary treatment. We systematically evaluated the available literature for second-line treatment of toxic seizures. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from inception through August of 2018, following PRISMA Guideline. The MESH terms focused on identifying treatments for seizures induced by drugs or other potentially toxic substances. We excluded the articles if they involved animals, had seizures resulting from alcohol withdrawal, were case reports, or not peer-reviewed. Our primary outcome was seizure termination and/or suppression by the second-line agent as agreed upon by two authors. We used descriptive statistics for analysis. RESULTS: We identified six case series that met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included case series contained nine to 235 patient cases each. The most common xenobiotic exposures were bupropion, isoniazid, and anti-psychotics. The description of seizure type and duration was diverse. First-line treatments were primarily benzodiazepines. Secondary treatments included propofol, barbiturates, phenytoin, valproic acid, and levetiracetam. Patient outcomes differed, attributable to any of the following: mixed toxic substances, drug-drug interactions, inability to control seizures, or toxicity of the anti-epileptic drugs (AED) themselves. Few cases specifically discussed the success of secondary treatment administration to suppress or terminate seizures. CONCLUSIONS: Available literature discussing second-line treatment for toxic seizures is of poor quality with high heterogeneity. Although the majority of articles used similar second-line agents, it is difficult to compare the efficacy of the regimens. Additional studies are necessary to identify the most efficacious second-line therapies in toxic seizures.

Serious Adverse Health Events, Including Death, Associated with Ingesting Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizers Containing Methanol - Arizona and New Mexico, May-June 2020.

Alcohol-based hand sanitizer is a liquid, gel, or foam that contains ethanol or isopropanol used to disinfect hands. Hand hygiene is an important component of the U.S. response to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). If soap and water are not readily available, CDC recommends the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer products that contain at least 60% ethyl alcohol (ethanol) or 70% isopropyl alcohol (isopropanol) in community settings (1); in health care settings, CDC recommendations specify that alcohol-based hand sanitizer products should contain 60%-95% alcohol (≥60% ethanol or ≥70% isopropanol) (2). According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which regulates alcohol-based hand sanitizers as an over-the-counter drug, methanol (methyl alcohol) is not an acceptable ingredient. Cases of ethanol toxicity following ingestion of alcohol-based hand sanitizer products have been reported in persons with alcohol use disorder (3,4). On June 30, 2020, CDC received notification from public health partners in Arizona and New Mexico of cases of methanol poisoning associated with ingestion of alcohol-based hand sanitizers. The case reports followed an FDA consumer alert issued on June 19, 2020, warning about specific hand sanitizers that contain methanol. Whereas early clinical effects of methanol and ethanol poisoning are similar (e.g., headache, blurred vision, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, loss of coordination, and decreased level of consciousness), persons with methanol poisoning might develop severe anion-gap metabolic acidosis, seizures, and blindness. If left untreated methanol poisoning can be fatal (5). Survivors of methanol poisoning might have permanent visual impairment, including complete vision loss; data suggest that vision loss results from the direct toxic effect of formate, a toxic anion metabolite of methanol, on the optic nerve (6). CDC and state partners established a case definition of alcohol-based hand sanitizer-associated methanol poisoning and reviewed 62 poison center call records from May 1 through June 30, 2020, to characterize reported cases. Medical records were reviewed to abstract details missing from poison center call records. During this period, 15 adult patients met the case definition, including persons who were American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN). All had ingested an alcohol-based hand sanitizer and were subsequently admitted to a hospital. Four patients died and three were discharged with vision impairment. Persons should never ingest alcohol-based hand sanitizer, avoid use of specific imported products found to contain methanol, and continue to monitor FDA guidance (7). Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for methanol poisoning when evaluating adult or pediatric patients with reported swallowing of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer product or with symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings (e.g., elevated anion-gap metabolic acidosis) compatible with methanol poisoning. Treatment of methanol poisoning includes supportive care, correction of acidosis, administration of an alcohol dehydrogenase inhibitor (e.g., fomepizole), and frequently, hemodialysis.

The Efficacy of Antivenin Latrodectus (Black Widow) Equine Immune F(ab')2 Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Latrodectism: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Clinical Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The antivenom currently available for treatment of systemic black widow envenomation (latrodectism) is composed of equine whole immunoglobin. Although considered effective, it has been associated with anaphylaxis and 2 reported fatalities. We test the efficacy and safety of new equine antivenom composed of purified F(ab')2 antibody fragments. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 16 sites across the United States. Subjects aged 10 years or older with moderate to severe pain because of black widow spider envenomation received F(ab')2 antivenom or placebo. The primary outcome measure was treatment failure, which was defined as failure to achieve and maintain clinically significant reduction in pain for 48 hours posttreatment. Secondary measures of pain intensity differences and summed pain intensity difference were computed. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty patients were treated (29 antivenom and 31 placebo). The mean age was 39 years and 68% were male. There were 15 treatment failures in the antivenom group and 24 in the placebo group (P=.019). Differences in pain intensity difference between groups were lower at each postbaseline point, and the mean summed pain intensity difference was greater for the antivenom group (difference 2,133; 95% confidence interval 177 to 4,090). No deaths or serious drug-related adverse events were detected. CONCLUSION: The F(ab')2 antivenom met the predefined primary outcome of reduced treatment failures. Secondary outcomes of pain intensity difference and summed pain intensity difference also supported efficacy. The rate of symptom improvement in the placebo group was higher than expected, which may be related to enrollment criteria or placebo effect.

Levetiracetam in toxic seizures.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The use of levetiracetam (LEV) in the management of drug-induced seizures has not been systematically investigated. Repetitive and continuous seizures that do not respond to benzodiazepines require second line therapy. Levetiracetam has a unique receptor binding site, rapid absorption, no known cardiac effects at therapeutic doses, and is theoretically a good candidate for use in drug-induced seizures. We evaluate the safety of LEV and its association with seizure cessation in this retrospective chart review of patients who received LEV as a control agent in drug-induced seizures. METHODS: We identified the medical records of patients presenting to an urban, level 1 trauma center between 1 January 2010 and 31 May 2015 by ICD-9 codes based on the following: (1) a poisoning diagnosis, (2) a seizure diagnosis, and (3) administration of LEV. We included patients with a drug-induced seizure based on history, electroencephalogram results, blood alcohol concentrations, urine drug screens, and adequate documentation. We excluded patients with alcohol withdrawal, anoxic brain injury, subtherapeutic concentrations of other antiepileptics, hypoglycemia, and pseudoseizures. Primary outcomes of interest included cessation of active seizures or the prevention of seizure recurrence. We assessed safety by the presence or absence of adverse drug effects (ADE) attributed to the administration of LEV. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Half of the study cohort (17) presented with generalized tonic-clonic seizures (TCS); half (17) presented in generalized convulsive status epilepticus (GCSE). Six patients in GCSE received LEV during their seizures; 2 also received fosphenytoin. One improved immediately following LEV administration, and the remaining 5 had seizure control. Eleven GCSE patients (65%) remained seizure free after LEV therapy. The patients with TCS (17) received LEV after seizure(s) control. Sixteen (94%) were seizure-free during their hospital course. We found no adverse drug effects. In total, 27 of 34 patients (79%) had a return to baseline neurological and physical health. Six had long-term sequelae; none of which are known LEV side-effects. We identified 46 toxic substances and 22 known seizurogenic agents (48%). The median length of stay was 3.7 days (0.4-96), and the median duration of in-hospital LEV therapy was 1.6 days (0-49). CONCLUSIONS: Levetiracetam used as a second-line agent was associated with control of drug-induced seizures and prevention of seizure recurrence without obvious adverse effects. A prospective study is needed to confirm these results.

Occupational Snake Bites: a Prospective Case Series of Patients Reported to the ToxIC North American Snakebite Registry.

INTRODUCTION: In the developing world, occupation has been identified as a risk factor for snake bite. Such an association has not been described in the USA. The objective of this study was to describe the epidemiology and clinical manifestations of occupational snake bite in patients reported to the ToxIC North American Snakebite Registry (NASBR). METHODS: This was a prospective case series of patients reported to the ToxIC NASBR between January 1, 2014 and November 5, 2015. Variables collected included snake species, patient demographics, date and location of exposure, occupation, bite location, clinical manifestations, and management. RESULTS: Of 180 adult snake bites reported, 25 (13.9 %; 95 % CI 9.2-19.8 %) were occupational in nature. Rattlesnake envenomations were common (80 %). Most snake bites (96 %) occurred in men. Occupations most associated with snake bite were landscaping (28 %) and working directly with snakes (24 %). Fifty-six percent of bites occurred in an outdoor work environment. Seventy-six percent of envenomations were to the upper extremities. Intentional interaction occurred in 40 % of cases, all of which sustained finger envenomations. No cases presented with apparent acute ethanol intoxication. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of occupational snake bites occurred in men working outdoors and were unintentional injuries. Bites involving the upper extremity tended to result from intentional interactions. Acute ethanol intoxication did not appear to be involved with occupational envenomations.

Acute hepatotoxicity associated with therapeutic doses of intravenous acetaminophen.

BACKGROUND: IV acetaminophen at 4 g per day is considered safe, producing no hepatic failure in more than 1400 cases. Oxidation of acetaminophen forms a reactive intermediate that binds to cellular proteins resulting in acetaminophen-protein adducts (APAP-CYS). Serum concentrations of APAP-CYS have been found to correlate with acetaminophen-induced hepatotoxicity. We report a case of hepatotoxicity associated with therapeutic doses of IV acetaminophen, with elevated serum APAP-CYS. CASE DETAILS: The patient was a 92-year-old, 68 kg woman without known hepatic disease or ethanol abuse. On hospital day 3 she underwent laparoscopic reduction of internal hernias under general anesthesia. Surgery was uncomplicated and postoperatively she was treated with subcutaneous heparin and IV acetaminophen, 1 g every 6 h for almost 4 days (total dose = 13 g). At the start of therapy, transaminases were normal. On hospital day 5, she was noted to have marked transaminase elevations (AST: 4698 IU/L; ALT: 3914 IU/L) with increases in INR (1.68), ammonia (60 mcg/dL), and total bilirubin (1.8 mg/dL). Serum acetaminophen concentration was 15.3 mcg/mL 26 h after her last dose. Acetaminophen was discontinued and IV acetylcysteine was given and continued at the second maintenance dose rate for a second 16-hour infusion, at which time transaminases, INR, ammonia and total bilirubin were all improving. The patient was discharged 2 days later. Serum APAP-CYS concentrations in serum samples obtained during her hospitalization were elevated (peak = 4.81 µM on hospital day 5; expected range for therapeutic dosing <1.1 µM). CASE DISCUSSION: We have identified a case of acute liver injury associated with therapeutic dosing of IV acetaminophen. The serum APAP-CYS concentrations are consistent with that seen in cases of hepatotoxicity following repeated supratherapeutic acetaminophen ingestion. Several factors that likely contributed to her susceptibility included advanced age, post-operative status, a likely catabolic state and multiple acetaminophen doses over several days. These uncommon circumstances limit the generalizability of risk. We believe the findings are most consistent with acetaminophen-induced liver injury. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates a potential hazard of IV acetaminophen and demonstrates the potential utility of APAP-CYS adducts in evaluating causality in acute liver injury.

Acetaminophen concentrations prior to 4 hours of ingestion: impact on diagnostic decision-making and treatment.

BACKGROUND: Consensus recommendations for acute acetaminophen exposure include plotting an acetaminophen concentration at ≥ 4 h post ingestion on the Rumack-Matthew nomogram to determine the need for acetylcysteine treatment. We studied the frequency of acetaminophen concentrations drawn within 4 h post ingestion and whether the Rumack-Matthew nomogram was properly used in making acetylcysteine treatment decisions. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational case series at three regional poison centers of acute acetaminophen exposures between 1/1/13 and 12/31/13. Cases were analyzed for demographics, timing of acetaminophen concentrations, and application of the Rumack-Matthew nomogram in acetylcysteine initiation or termination. RESULTS: 1,123 cases of acute acetaminophen exposure were reviewed. Of 520 acute acetaminophen exposure cases presenting < 4 h post ingestion, 323 (62%) had a pre-4-hour acetaminophen concentration measured and 197 (38%) did not. Those with a known pre-4-hour acetaminophen concentration were less likely to have a 4-hour acetaminophen concentration (59% vs. 93%) or an acetaminophen concentration within 8 h (87% vs. 99%) and were more likely to be treated with acetylcysteine (29% vs. 17%) and less likely to be treated based on the Rumack-Matthew nomogram (72% vs. 97%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a known exposure time and presenting within 4 h of acetaminophen ingestion had a pre-4-hour acetaminophen concentration obtained 62% of the time. Pre-4-hour acetaminophen concentrations cannot be used to determine the need for acetylcysteine therapy and are associated with an increased likelihood of not obtaining optimally timed acetaminophen concentrations and acetylcysteine management not based on the proper application of the Rumack-Matthew nomogram. Current practice results in additional cost, unnecessary treatment, potential adverse medication effects, and the possibility of non-treatment of patients at risk of hepatotoxicity.