Gabapentin, opioids, and the risk of opioid-related death: A population-based nested case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid use is highly associated with risk of opioid-related death, with 1 of every 550 chronic opioid users dying within approximately 2.5 years of their first opioid prescription. Although gabapentin is widely perceived as safe, drug-induced respiratory depression has been described when gabapentin is used alone or in combination with other medications. Because gabapentin and opioids are both commonly prescribed for pain, the likelihood of co-prescription is high. However, no published studies have examined whether concomitant gabapentin therapy is associated with an increased risk of accidental opioid-related death in patients receiving opioids. The objective of this study was to investigate whether co-prescription of opioids and gabapentin is associated with an increased risk of accidental opioid-related mortality. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a population-based nested case-control study among opioid users who were residents of Ontario, Canada, between August 1, 1997, and December 31, 2013, using administrative databases. Cases, defined as opioid users who died of an opioid-related cause, were matched with up to 4 controls who also used opioids on age, sex, year of index date, history of chronic kidney disease, and a disease risk index. After matching, we included 1,256 cases and 4,619 controls. The primary exposure was concomitant gabapentin use in the 120 days preceding the index date. A secondary analysis characterized gabapentin dose as low (<900 mg daily), moderate (900 to 1,799 mg daily), or high (≥1,800 mg daily). A sensitivity analysis examined the effect of concomitant nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use in the preceding 120 days. Overall, 12.3% of cases (155 of 1,256) and 6.8% of controls (313 of 4,619) were prescribed gabapentin in the prior 120 days. After multivariable adjustment, co-prescription of opioids and gabapentin was associated with a significantly increased odds of opioid-related death (odds ratio [OR] 1.99, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.47, p < 0.001; adjusted OR [aOR] 1.49, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.88, p < 0.001) compared to opioid prescription alone. In the dose-response analysis, moderate-dose (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.46 to 2.87, p < 0.001; aOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.28, p = 0.024) and high-dose (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.58 to 3.08, p < 0.001; aOR 1.58, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.27, p = 0.015) gabapentin use was associated with a nearly 60% increase in the odds of opioid-related death relative to no concomitant gabapentin use. As expected, we found no significant association between co-prescription of opioids and NSAIDs and opioid-related death (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27, p = 0.113; aOR 1.14, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.32, p = 0.083). In an exploratory analysis of patients at risk of combined opioid and gabapentin use, we found that 46.0% (45,173 of 98,288) of gabapentin users in calendar year 2013 received at least 1 concomitant prescription for an opioid. This study was limited to individuals eligible for public drug coverage in Ontario, we were only able to identify prescriptions reimbursed by the government and dispensed from retail pharmacies, and information on indication for gabapentin use was not available. Furthermore, as with all observational studies, confounding due to unmeasured variables is a potential source of bias. CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found that among patients receiving prescription opioids, concomitant treatment with gabapentin was associated with a substantial increase in the risk of opioid-related death. Clinicians should consider carefully whether to continue prescribing this combination of products and, when the combination is deemed necessary, should closely monitor their patients and adjust opioid dose accordingly. Future research should investigate whether a similar interaction exists between pregabalin and opioids.

Experts Consensus Recommendations for the Management of Calcium Channel Blocker Poisoning in Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a management approach for adults with calcium channel blocker poisoning. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA EXTRACTION: Following the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument, initial voting statements were constructed based on summaries outlining the evidence, risks, and benefits. DATA SYNTHESIS: We recommend 1) for asymptomatic patients, observation and consideration of decontamination following a potentially toxic calcium channel blocker ingestion (1D); 2) as first-line therapies (prioritized based on desired effect), IV calcium (1D), high-dose insulin therapy (1D-2D), and norepinephrine and/or epinephrine (1D). We also suggest dobutamine or epinephrine in the presence of cardiogenic shock (2D) and atropine in the presence of symptomatic bradycardia or conduction disturbance (2D); 3) in patients refractory to the first-line treatments, we suggest incremental doses of high-dose insulin therapy if myocardial dysfunction is present (2D), IV lipid-emulsion therapy (2D), and using a pacemaker in the presence of unstable bradycardia or high-grade arteriovenous block without significant alteration in cardiac inotropism (2D); 4) in patients with refractory shock or who are periarrest, we recommend incremental doses of high-dose insulin (1D) and IV lipid-emulsion therapy (1D) if not already tried. We suggest venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, if available, when refractory shock has a significant cardiogenic component (2D), and using pacemaker in the presence of unstable bradycardia or high-grade arteriovenous block in the absence of myocardial dysfunction (2D) if not already tried; 5) in patients with cardiac arrest, we recommend IV calcium in addition to the standard advanced cardiac life-support (1D), lipid-emulsion therapy (1D), and we suggest venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation if available (2D). CONCLUSION: We offer recommendations for the stepwise management of calcium channel blocker toxicity. For all interventions, the level of evidence was very low.

Predictors of Opioid-Related Death During Methadone Therapy.

We aimed to examine pharmacologic, demographic and medical comorbidity risk factors for opioid-related mortality among patients currently receiving methadone for an opioid use disorder. We conducted a population-based, nested case-control study linking healthcare and coroner's records in Ontario, Canada, from January 31, 1994 to December 31, 2010. We included social assistance recipients receiving methadone for an opioid use disorder. Within this group, cases were those who died of opioid-related causes. For each case, we identified up to 5 controls matched on calendar quarter. The primary analysis examined the association between use of psychotropic drugs (benzodiazepines, antidepressants or antipsychotics) and opioid-related mortality. Secondary analyses examined the associations between baseline characteristics, health service utilization, comorbidities and opioid-related mortality. Among 43,545 patients receiving methadone for an opioid use disorder, we identified 175 (0.4%) opioid-related deaths, along with 873 matched controls. Psychotropic drug use was associated with a two fold increased risk of opioid-related death (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 3.5). Specifically, benzodiazepines (adjusted OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.5) and antipsychotics (adjusted OR 2.3; 95% CI 1.5 to 3.5) were independently associated with opioid-related death. Other associated factors included chronic lung disease (adjusted OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.2 to 2.6), an alcohol use disorder (adjusted OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.2), mood disorders (adjusted OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.0 to 3.2), and a history of heart disease (adjusted OR 5.3; 95% CI 2.0 to 14.0). Psychotropic drug use is associated with opioid-related death in patients receiving methadone. Mindfulness of these factors may reduce the risk of death among methadone recipients.

Fluoroquinolone therapy and idiosyncratic acute liver injury: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Although fluoroquinolones are sometimes associated with mild, transient elevations in aminotransferase levels, serious acute liver injury is uncommon. Regulatory warnings have identified moxifloxacin as presenting a particular risk of hepatotoxicity. Thus, we examined the risk of idiosyncratic acute liver injury associated with the use of moxifloxacin relative to other selected antibiotic agents. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, nested, case-control study using health care data from Ontario for the period April 2002 to March 2011. We identified cases as outpatients aged 66 years or older with no history of liver disease, and who were admitted to hospital for acute liver injury within 30 days of receiving a prescription for 1 of 5 broad-spectrum antibiotic agents: moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, cefuroxime axetil or clarithromycin. For each case, we selected up to 10 age- and sex-matched controls from among patients who had received a study antibiotic, but who were not admitted to hospital for acute liver injury. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) to determine the association between admission to hospital and previous exposure to an antibiotic agent, using clarithromycin as the reference. RESULTS: A total of 144 patients were admitted to hospital for acute liver injury within 30 days of receiving a prescription for one of the identified drugs. Of these patients, 88 (61.1%) died while in hospital. After multivariable adjustment, use of either moxifloxacin (adjusted OR 2.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-3.98) or levofloxacin (adjusted OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.01-3.39) was associated with an increase in risk of acute liver injury relative to the use of clarithromycin. We saw no such risk associated with the use of either ciprofloxacin or cefuroxime axetil. INTERPRETATION: Among older outpatients with no evidence of liver disease, moxifloxacin and levofloxacin were associated with an increased risk of acute liver injury relative to clarithromycin.

Comparative adherence to oxybutynin or tolterodine among older patients.

PURPOSE: To compare persistence of oxybutynin or tolterodine therapy among older patients newly prescribed one of these drugs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of Ontarians aged 66 years and older who were newly prescribed either drug between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2007. Persistence with treatment was defined on the basis of refills for the drug within a grace period equal to 50% of the prescription duration. RESULTS: We identified 31,996 patients newly treated with oxybutynin and 24,855 newly treated with tolterodine. After 2 years of follow-up, persistence on oxybutynin (9.4%) was significantly lower than that on tolterodine (13.6%, p < 0.0001). The median time to discontinuation of oxybutynin and tolterodine was 68 and 128 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the tolerability of these drugs differs substantially.

Beta-blockers and cardiovascular outcomes in dialysis patients: a cohort study in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers may be cardioprotective in patients receiving chronic dialysis. We examined cardiovascular outcomes among incident dialysis patients receiving beta-blocker therapy. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study employing linked healthcare databases in Ontario, Canada. We studied all consecutive chronic dialysis patients aged≥66 years who initiated dialysis between 1 July 1991 and 31 July 2007. Patients were divided into three groups according to new medication use after the initiation of chronic dialysis. The three groups were patients initiated on beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers and statins only. Patients in the beta-blocker and calcium channel blocker groups could also be concurrently receiving a statin. The primary outcome was time to a composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, stroke or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: There were a total of 1836 patients (504 beta-blocker, 570 calcium channel blocker and 762 statin-only users). Compared to statin-only use, beta-blocker use was not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.23]. As expected, calcium channel blocker use was also not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes (aHR 0.91, 95% CI 0.79-1.06). Among all subgroup analyses by beta-blocker attributes, only high-dose beta-blocker therapy was associated with better cardiovascular outcomes as compared to low-dose beta-blockers (aHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.88). CONCLUSIONS: We observed no beneficial effect of beta-blocker use among patients receiving chronic dialysis relative to our comparator groups. Given current uncertainty around the cardioprotective benefits of beta-blockers in patients receiving dialysis, a large randomized clinical trial is warranted.

Hyperbaric oxygen for carbon monoxide poisoning.

BACKGROUND: Poisoning with carbon monoxide (CO) remains an important cause of accidental and intentional injury worldwide. Several unblinded non-randomized trials have suggested that the use of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) prevents the development of neurological sequelae. This has led to the widespread use of HBO in the management of patients with carbon monoxide poisoning. OBJECTIVES: To examine randomised trials of the efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) compared to normobaric oxygen (NBO) for the prevention of neurologic sequelae in patients with acute carbon monoxide poisoning. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following electronic databases; Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register (searched June 2010), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) 1950 to June 2010, EMBASE (Ovid SP) 1980 to June 2010, ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) 1970 to June 2010, ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) 1990 to June 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials of HBO compared to NBO, involving non-pregnant adults who are acutely poisoned with carbon monoxide (regardless of severity). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted from each trial information on: the number of randomised patients, types of participants, the dose and duration of the intervention, and the prevalence of neurologic symptoms at follow-up. MAIN RESULTS: Seven randomised controlled trials of varying quality were identified; one was excluded because it did not evaluate clinical outcomes. Of the six remaining trials involving 1361 participants, two found a beneficial effect of HBO for the reduction of neurologic sequelae at one month, while four others did not. One of these is an incomplete publication (an abstract of an interim analysis). Although pooled random effects meta-analysis does not suggest a significant benefit from HBOT (OR for neurological deficits 0.78, 95%CI 0.54 to 1.12), significant methodologic and statistical heterogeneity was apparent among the trials, and this result should be interpreted cautiously. Moreover, design or analysis flaws were evident in all trials. Importantly, the conclusions of one positive trial may have been influenced by failure to adjust for multiple hypothesis testing, while interpretation of the other positive trial is hampered by a high risk of bias introduced during the analysis including an apparent change in the primary outcome. Both were also stopped early 'for benefit', which is likely to have inflated the observed effect. In contrast three negative trials had low power to detect a benefit of HBO due to exclusion of severely poisoned patients in two and very poor follow-up in the other. One trial that was said to be finished around eight years ago has not reported the final analysis in any forum. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Existing randomised trials do not establish whether the administration of HBO to patients with carbon monoxide poisoning reduces the incidence of adverse neurologic outcomes. Additional research is needed to better define the role, if any, of HBO in the treatment of patients with carbon monoxide poisoning. This research question is ideally suited to a multi-center randomised controlled trial.

Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers and cardiovascular outcomes in elderly patients: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are widely used for the treatment of hypertension and angina. Despite safety concerns associated with short-acting agents, increasing evidence supports the safety of long-acting dihydropyridines. Although amlodipine is the best studied of these, there are few studies comparing it with nifedipine. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between hospitalization for acute coronary syndromes and treatment with amlodipine or extended-release nifedipine in patients 65 years of age and older. The primary objective was a composite of hospital admission for angina or acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: The present population-based, retrospective cohort study used linked health care databases from Ontario. Propensity scores were used to identify highly similar patients started on amlodipine or extended-release nifedipine between April 1997 and March 2002. Time-to-event analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: The analysis included 24,190 patients (44% male; mean age 75 years) treated with amlodipine or extended-release nifedipine (n=12,095 each). The number of patients reaching the primary end point was 362 (3%) and 294 (2.4%) in the amlodipine and nifedipine groups, respectively. The groups were similar in a large number of demographic and clinical characteristics. No significant differences were observed among users of extended-release nifedipine (adjusted hazard ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13) relative to amlodipine. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that amlodipine and extended-release nifedipine are not associated with differential rates of acute coronary events in older patients.

Appropriateness of spironolactone prescribing in heart failure patients: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES) established the safety and benefit of spironolactone for heart failure (HF) patients with systolic dysfunction. However, recent data have raised concerns regarding hyperkalemia secondary to spironolactone use and suggest it occurs more commonly in routine practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: We explored factors potentially associated with hyperkalemia from spironolactone therapy in a population-based cohort of 9165 HF patients hospitalized in Ontario, Canada, between 1999 and 2001. Compared with patients enrolled in RALES, community-based patients were older (mean age 75 years versus 65 years, P < .001) and were more likely to be female (50% versus 27%, P < .001). Of the 1502 patients that were prescribed spironolactone at discharge, 18% had elevated serum potassium levels (>5 mmol/L) during hospitalization and 23% were discharged on concurrent potassium supplements. Although only 8% of patients had serum creatinine >2.5 mg/dL, many patients had stage III (53.1%), stage IV (12.8%), or stage V (3.9%) chronic renal insufficiency according to glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSION: Spironolactone was often prescribed to inappropriate HF candidates because of the presence of relative or absolute contraindications. These findings highlight the need for more careful patient selection when prescribing spironolactone to minimize potential life-threatening hyperkalemia.

Hyperbaric oxygen for carbon monoxide poisoning : a systematic review and critical analysis of the evidence.

Poisoning with carbon monoxide (CO) is an important cause of unintentional and intentional injury worldwide. Hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) enhances CO elimination and has been postulated to reduce the incidence of neurological sequelae. These observations have led some clinicians to use HBO for selected patients with CO poisoning, although there is considerable variability in clinical practice. This article assesses the effectiveness of HBO compared with normobaric oxygen (NBO) for the prevention of neurological sequelae in patients with acute CO poisoning. The following databases were searched: MEDLINE (1966 to present), EMBASE (1980 to present), and the Controlled Trials Register of the Cochrane Collaboration, supplemented by a manual review of bibliographies of identified articles and discussion with recognised content experts. All randomised controlled trials involving people acutely poisoned with CO, regardless of severity, were examined. The primary analysis included all trials from which data could be extracted. Sensitivity analysis examined trials with better validity (defined using the validated instrument of Jadad) and those enrolling more severely poisoned patients. Two reviewers independently extracted from each trial, including information on the number of randomised patients, types of participants, the dose and duration of the intervention, and the prevalence of neurological sequelae at follow-up. A pooled odds ratio (OR) for the presence of neurological symptoms at 1-month follow-up was calculated using a random effects model. Bayesian models were also investigated to illustrate the degree of certainty about clinical effectiveness. Eight randomised controlled trials were identified. Two had no evaluable data and were excluded. The remaining trials were of varying quality and two have been published only as abstracts. The severity of CO poisoning varied among trials. At 1-month follow-up after treatment, sequelae possibly related to CO poisoning were present in 242 of 761 patients (36.1%) treated with NBO, compared with 259 of 718 patients (31.8%) treated with HBO. Restricting the analysis to the trials with the highest quality scores or those that enrolled all patients regardless of severity did not change the lack of statistical significance in the outcome of the pooled analysis. We found empiric evidence of multiple biases that operated to inflate the benefit of HBO in two positive trials. In contrast, the interpretation of negative trials was hampered by low rates of follow-up, unusual interventions for control patients and inclusion of less severely poisoned patients. Collectively, these limitations may have led negative trials to overlook a real and substantial benefit of HBO (type II error). There is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of HBO treatment for patients with CO poisoning. Methodological shortcomings are evident in all published trials, with empiric evidence of bias in some, particularly those that suggest a benefit of HBO. Bayesian analysis further illustrates the uncertainty about a meaningful clinical benefit. Consequently, firm guidelines regarding the use of HBO for patients with CO poisoning cannot be established. Further research is needed to better define the role of HBO, if any, in the treatment of CO poisoning. Such research should not exclude patients with severe poisoning, have a primary outcome that is clinically meaningful and have oversight from an independent data monitoring and ethics committee.

N-acetylcysteine for the treatment of clove oil-induced fulminant hepatic failure.

We present a 3-month-old female who developed fulminant hepatic failure after ingesting less than 8 mL of clove oil. Initial treatment involved gastrointestinal decontamination, supportive measures, and admission to hospital. She subsequently developed fulminant hepatic failure and was treated with intravenous N-acetylcysteine (N-AC) according to a protocol used for acetaminophen poisoning. Over the next 72 h her liver synthetic function and clinical status improved, and she made a complete recovery. Previous reported cases of clove oil toxicity and the potential role of N-AC therapy are reviewed.

Iron poisoning in young children: association with the birth of a sibling.

BACKGROUND: Iron is a leading cause of death due to poisoning in young children. Because perinatal iron therapy is common, the presence of these tablets, which have a candylike appearence, in the home may pose a hazard to a mother's other young children. We explored the association between iron poisoning in young children and the birth of a sibling. METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-control study linking health care databases in Ontario. Health care records for the mothers of children less than 3 years of age admitted to hospital with iron poisoning between Apr. 1, 1991, and Mar. 31, 2000, were compared with those for the mothers of age- and sex-matched control children without iron poisoning. RESULTS: We studied records for 40 children admitted to hospital for iron poisoning. Seventeen cases (42%) occurred within a year (before or after) a sibling's birth. Children whose mothers had given birth to a sibling were almost twice as likely as children whose mothers had not given birth to a sibling to be admitted for iron poisoning within 6 months of birth (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9 to 3.9). The postpartum year was associated with a consistently elevated risk, including an almost 4-fold increase in the risk of iron poisoning during the first postpartum month (adjusted OR 3.6, 95% CI 0.8 to 16.5). INTERPRETATION: Pregnancy is a major risk factor for iron poisoning in young children, and the period immediately after delivery is associated with the greatest risk. Almost half of all hospital admissions for iron poisoning in young children could be prevented by keeping iron supplements safely out of reach in the year before and after the birth of a sibling.