Available extracorporeal treatments for poisoning: overview and limitations.

Poisoning is a significant public health problem. In severe cases, extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) may be required to prevent or reverse major toxicity. Available ECTRs include intermittent hemodialysis, sustained low-efficiency dialysis, intermittent hemofiltration and hemodiafiltration, continuous renal replacement therapy, hemoperfusion, therapeutic plasma exchange, exchange transfusion, peritoneal dialysis, albumin dialysis, cerebrospinal fluid exchange, and extracorporeal life support. The aim of this article was to provide an overview of the technical aspects, as well as the potential indications and limitations of the different ECTRs used for poisoned patients.

A stepwise approach for the management of poisoning with extracorporeal treatments.

The use of an extracorporeal treatment (ECTR) in a poisoned patient may be life-saving in a limited number of scenarios. The decision-processes surrounding the use of ECTR in poisoning is complex: most nephrologists are not trained to assess a poisoned patient while clinical toxicologists rarely prescribe ECTRs. Deciding on which ECTR is most appropriate for a poison requires a good understanding of the poison's physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties. Further, a detailed understanding of the capabilities and limitations of the different ECTRs can be useful to select the most appropriate ECTR for a given clinical situation. This manuscript provides a stepwise approach to assess the usefulness of ECTRs in poisoning.

Guidelines for reporting case studies on extracorporeal treatments in poisonings: methodology.

A literature review performed by the EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning (EXTRIP) workgroup highlighted deficiencies in the existing literature, especially the reporting of case studies. Although general reporting guidelines exist for case studies, there are none in the specific field of extracorporeal treatments in toxicology. Our goal was to construct and propose a checklist that systematically outlines the minimum essential items to be reported in a case study of poisoned patients undergoing extracorporeal treatments. Through a modified two-round Delphi technique, panelists (mostly chosen from the EXTRIP workgroup) were asked to vote on the pertinence of a set of items to identify those considered minimally essential for reporting complete and accurate case reports. Furthermore, independent raters validated the clarity of each selected items between each round of voting. All case reports containing data on extracorporeal treatments in poisoning published in Medline in 2011 were reviewed during the external validation rounds. Twenty-one panelists (20 from the EXTRIP workgroup and an invited expert on pharmacology reporting guidelines) participated in the modified Delphi technique. This group included journal editors and experts in nephrology, clinical toxicology, critical care medicine, emergency medicine, and clinical pharmacology. Three independent raters participated in the validation rounds. Panelists voted on a total of 144 items in the first round and 137 items in the second round, with response rates of 96.3% and 98.3%, respectively. Twenty case reports were evaluated at each validation round and the independent raters' response rate was 99.6% and 98.8% per validation round. The final checklist consists of 114 items considered essential for case study reporting. This methodology of alternate voting and external validation rounds was useful in developing the first reporting guideline for case studies in the field of extracorporeal treatments in poisoning. We believe that this guideline will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports may provide early signals of effectiveness and/or harm, thereby improving healthcare decision-making.

Calcium-Sensing Receptor Genotype and Response to Cinacalcet in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We tested the hypothesis that single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the calcium-sensing receptor (CASR) alter the response to the calcimimetic cinacalcet. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We analyzed DNA samples in the Evaluation of Cinacalcet HCl Therapy to Lower Cardiovascular Events (EVOLVE) trial, a randomized trial comparing cinacalcet to placebo on a background of usual care. Of the 3883 patients randomized, 1919 (49%) consented to DNA collection, and samples from 1852 participants were genotyped for 18 CASR polymorphisms. The European ancestry (EA; n=1067) and African ancestry (AfAn; n=405) groups were assessed separately. SNPs in CASR were tested for their association with biochemical measures of mineral metabolism at baseline, percent change from baseline to 20 weeks, and risk of clinical fracture as dependent variables. RESULTS: There were modest associations of CASR SNPs with increased baseline serum parathyroid hormone and bone alkaline phosphatase primarily with the minor allele in the EA group (all P≤0.03), but not in the AfAn sample. In contrast, there was a modest association of decreased baseline serum calcium and FGF23 with CASR SNPs (P=0.04) primarily with the minor allele in the AfAn but not in the EA sample. The minor allele of two SNPs was associated with decreased percent reduction in parathyroid hormone from baseline to 20 weeks in the EA population (P<0.04) and this was not altered with cinacalcet. In both EA and AfAn, the same SNP (rs9740) was associated with decreased calcium with cinacalcet treatment (EA and AfAn P≤0.03). Three SNPs in high linkage disequilibrium were associated with a higher risk of clinical fracture that was attenuated by cinacalcet treatment in the EA sample (P<0.04). CONCLUSIONS: These modest associations, if validated, may provide explanations for differences in CKD-mineral bone disorder observed in EA and AfAn populations, and for differential biochemical responses to calcimimetics.

The EXTRIP (EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning) workgroup: guideline methodology.

Extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs), such as hemodialysis and hemoperfusion, are used in poisoning despite a lack of controlled human trials demonstrating efficacy. To provide uniform recommendations, the EXTRIP group was formed as an international collaboration among recognized experts from nephrology, clinical toxicology, critical care, or pharmacology and supported by over 30 professional societies. For every poison, the clinical benefit of ECTR is weighed against associated complications, alternative therapies, and costs. Rigorous methodology, using the AGREE instrument, was developed and ratified. Methods rely on evidence appraisal and, in the absence of robust studies, on a thorough and transparent process of consensus statements. Twenty-four poisons were chosen according to their frequency, available evidence, and relevance. A systematic literature search was performed in order to retrieve all original publications regardless of language. Data were extracted on a standardized instrument. Quality of the evidence was assessed by GRADE as: High = A, Moderate = B, Low = C, Very Low = D. For every poison, dialyzability was assessed and clinical effect of ECTR summarized. All pertinent documents were submitted to the workgroup with a list of statements for vote (general statement, indications, timing, ECTR choice). A modified Delphi method with two voting rounds was used, between which deliberation was required. Each statement was voted on a Likert scale (1-9) to establish the strength of recommendation. This approach will permit the production of the first important practice guidelines on this topic.