Is ethyl chloride the new nitrous oxide? A case report.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, there has been an emerging trend of recreational misuse of several drugs and inhaled solvent including ethyl chloride. This case report follows CARE guidelines and highlights, with supporting video, the neurological features of ethyl chloride intoxication. CASE PRESENTATION: A 48-year-old man was seen for the sudden occurrence of an unsteady gait with dizziness. His only medical history was a chronic and treated HIV infection without any complications. Clinical examination revealed a cerebellar syndrome associated with impairment of short-term memory. Biological and radiological workups were normal. After several days, the patient recalled ethyl chloride inhalation. He fully recovered after being discharged from hospital. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should recognise the clinical features and neurological manifestations of ethyl chloride intoxication due to the potential fatal cardiovascular complications of this intoxication.

Reversible Neurotoxicity Due To Excessive Use of Ethyl Chloride.

BACKGROUND: Ethyl chloride is commercially available as a DVD/VCR cleaner, and can be found as a gasoline additive and topical anesthetic. There is an emerging trend of recreational huffing to enhance sexual relations. Neurotoxicity from repeated abuse is uncommon. CASE REPORT: A 36-year-old man with a history of intermittent ethyl chloride use for 15 years presented to the Emergency Department with an inability to walk for 4 days after frequent use for 1 week. The patient reported a rapid titration of inhalation from zero to eight cans of 4.6 oz ethyl chloride aerosol per day over a 1-week period. Initial vital signs were heart rate 88 beats/min, blood pressure 147/60 mm Hg, temperature 37.2°C (99°F), and respiratory rate 16 breaths/min. Physical examination was notable for slurred speech, ptosis, a wide-based and ataxic gait with short strides, inability to stand without support, loss of toe/finger proprioception, horizontal and vertical nystagmus, and dysmetria on coordination testing. Strength and sensation were preserved. His work-up included computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain, cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine that demonstrated no acute abnormalities. On hospital day 9, the patient was able to ambulate with mild difficulty. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Toxicity from excessive ethyl chloride huffing has been rarely reported. The toxicity was characterized with cerebellar findings, no attributable laboratory abnormalities, and no radiographic abnormalities on computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging. The neurotoxicity resolved with supportive care. This case of excessive huffing of ethyl chloride presenting with neurotoxicity and ataxia further characterizes a rare complication of ethyl chloride toxicity that is gaining popularity.

Ethyl chloride spray, a local anesthetic in arterial blood gas sampling: A randomized, controlled, double-blinded study.

AIM: Arterial blood gas sampling provides useful information on respiratory parameters and acid-base balance. However, this procedure is painful and uncomfortable for the patient. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the analgesic efficacy of ethyl chloride spray compared to a placebo during radial artery blood gas sampling. METHOD: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted at the emergency department of a tertiary hospital. A total of 202 patients were randomly divided into two groups: ethyl chloride spray (n = 101) and placebo (n = 101). The analgesic efficacy of ethyl chloride spray was compared with the placebo using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). RESULTS: The VAS score was determined to be 4 [interquartile range (IQR): 1.0] for the ethyl chloride spray group and 5 (IQR: 1.0) for the placebo group. The analgesic efficacy of ethyl chloride spray in reducing pain was statistically significantly higher compared to the placebo (p = 0.000). CONCLUSION: Ethyl chloride spray has analgesic efficacy in arterial blood gas sampling. Therefore, the use of this spray provides an analgesic effect on patients during arterial blood gas sampling performed in the emergency department.

Ethyl chloride spray for musculoskeletal ultrasound-guided injections: An alternative to subcutaneous injection of local anesthetic solution.

Ultrasound-guided injections such as steroid injections are common procedures involving the musculoskeletal system. They are usually performed after a subcutaneous injection of local anesthetic (LA), which can be painful. In 126 consecutive patients, local anesthesia was performed using ethyl chloride spray prior to a therapeutic ultrasound-guided injection in joints, tendons, or bursae. Ninety-nine (78.5%) patients found the use of ethyl chloride spray helpful. The use of ethyl chloride spray is an effective, patient-friendly alternative to the standard injection of local aesthetic for ultrasound-guided therapeutic musculoskeletal injections with the advantage of a lower cost of $0.18 per procedure.

Use and Effectiveness of Ethyl Chloride for Hand Injections.

PURPOSE: Limited literature supports using ethyl chloride topical spray as an anesthetic for hand injections whereas documented risks include frostbite, skin irritation, and inhalation toxicity. We hypothesize that ethyl chloride spray imparts no benefit to patients' perception of pain or anxiety for routine hand injections. METHODS: We first surveyed all members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand to discern the prevalence of ethyl chloride use during routine injections. We then performed a prospective, randomized, study at 2 institutions evaluating the efficacy of ethyl chloride spray compared with "routine injection" (no topical spray) in patients indicated for a hand injection. All patients completed a pre- and postinjection 11-point questionnaire that inquired about various components of pain and anxiety. RESULTS: A total of 2,083 (73% response rate) American Society for Surgery of the Hand members responded to the survey and revealed that 59% of hand surgeons always or often use ethyl chloride, and 24% never use it. There were no differences for region or practice setting, but experienced surgeons were less likely to routinely use ethyl chloride (35%) compared with younger surgeons (66%). Among 151 patients participating in the clinical study (75 with ethyl chloride), there were no differences for any outcome measure assessed. Injection pain in the spray and no-spray groups, pain after 1 minute, and overall anxiety were equivalent. Subgroup analysis demonstrated no effect of sex, anticipated anxiety, or pain threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Ethyl chloride is widely used among hand surgeons but imparts no benefit for routine hand injections in the clinical setting. The potential risks and costs of ethyl chloride use may outweigh its benefits. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.

Preventive effect of a vapocoolant spray on propofol-induced pain: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study.

PURPOSE: Propofol causes injection pain. Although lidocaine pre-treatment via venous occlusion is known to be the most effective way, it still has some inconvenience. We implemented this study to compare the effect of a vapocoolant spray with lidocaine pre-treatment. METHODS: Participants (n = 90) were randomized to one of three groups. Group V: after placebo injection and tourniquet, the vapocoolant spray was applied; group L: after lidocaine injection and tourniquet, the placebo spray was applied; group C: after placebo injection and tourniquet, the placebo spray was applied. The intensity of propofol-induced pain, the incidence of metallic taste, and the satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: Propofol-induced pain was significantly lower in groups V and L than in group C [0.5 (0-2.25), 0.5 (0-1), and 5 (1-7), median (interquartile range), respectively, p < 0.001]. There was no significant difference in pain intensity between groups V and L. Group L showed a significantly higher incidence of metallic taste than groups V and C (23, 0, and 0%, respectively; p = 0.001). Groups V and L showed higher satisfaction scores than group C [5 (4-5), 4 (3.75-5), and 2 (2-3), respectively; p < 0.001], and there was a significant difference between groups V and L (p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Vapocoolant spray showed a similar effect to lidocaine in analgesia and lowered the incidence of a metallic taste. These resulted in greater satisfaction with the vapocoolant spray compared with lidocaine. Vapocoolant spray is an effective and convenient way to prevent propofol-induced pain.

Efficacy of ShotBlocker device versus vapocoolant spray for spinal needle pain relief during spinal anaesthesia in elective caesarean section - A randomised controlled trial.

Background and Aims: Apprehension of pain due to a spinal needle is often a cause of anxiety and refusal. ShotBlocker provides non-painful physical stimulation, inhibiting pain perception. The vapocoolant spray contains ethyl chloride vapours, rapidly raising the skin temperature and hampering the transmission of noxious stimuli. The present study compared the effectiveness of the ShotBlocker device and the vapocoolant spray in reducing spinal needle-associated pain in primigravida women undergoing elective lower-segment caesarean section (LSCS). Methods: We enroled 144 primigravida women undergoing elective LSCS and were randomised to Group SB (the ShotBlocker device was firmly pressed over the skin, and the spinal needle was inserted through its slit), Group V (the vapocoolant spray was applied at the puncture site before spinal needle insertion), and Group C (received local infiltration before spinal anaesthesia (SA)). The groups were compared for needle-associated pain and patient satisfaction using a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) and a 3-point Likert scale. Results: The mean (standard deviation) [95% confidence interval (CI)] VAS scores of Group SB 3.85 (0.74) [3.64, 4.07] and Group V 3.04 (0.74) [2.83, 3.26] were significantly lower than that of Group C 5.19 (0.92) [3.28, 3.62]). On the Likert scale, the maximum number of patients in the vapocoolant group (64.6%) responded satisfactorily, while in the control group, the majority (62.5%) of participants responded dissatisfied (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Both the ShotBlocker and vapocoolant spray reduce needle puncture-associated pain before SA in primigravida patients undergoing elective LSCS. However, the vapocoolant spray is more beneficial in reducing spinal needle-associated pain than the ShotBlocker device.

Cryoanesthesia with ethyl chloride spray versus 5% lidocaine gel in alleviating oral local anesthetic injection pain for buccal anaesthesia: A randomized clinical (controlled) trial.

Background: Numbing the area of oral mucosa with cold application prior to administration of regional anesthesia has been widely used by various dentists in alleviating pain caused by needle prick. Cryoanesthesia using Endo-ice as topical anesthesia has been studied as a replacement to prevail the fallibility of topical anaesthetics. This study aimed to evaluate and compare effectiveness of ethyl chloride spray with 5% lidocaine gel in alleviating buccal anesthesia injection pain. Methods: Total of 90 outpatients were randomly divided into 3 groups as follows: Group 1 - cryotherapy with ethyl chloride at the anesthetic site preceding before administration of local anesthesia; Group 2 - topical application of 5% LIDOCAINE GEL preceding before administration of local anesthesia; and group 3 - control that did not receive any topical agent preceding before administration of local anesthesia. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to document pain immediately after injection prick. Results: About comparison of pain scores, significant difference was found between group 1 (ethyl chloride) and group 2 (topical lidocaine) patients (P=0.001). For group 1, about 15 (50%) patients suffered from mild pain, followed by 14 (46.67%) patients suffering from moderate pain. However, majority of the 21 (70%) patients in group 2 suffered from moderate pain. All the patients in group 3 suffered from severe pain. Conclusion: Importance of alleviating fear of needle injection phobia amongst patients is of paramount importance. Ethyl chloride was found to be more effective than topical lidocaine in alleviating needle injection pain before administration of local anesthetic injection.

Recognizing Ethyl Chloride Neurotoxicity: Inhalant Abuse Hidden in Plain Sight.

Ethyl chloride is a common topical anesthetic. However, when abused as an inhalant, effects can range from headaches and dizziness to debilitating neurotoxicity requiring intubation. While previous case reports describe the short-term reversible neurotoxicity of ethyl chloride, ours show chronic morbidity and mortality outcome. During the initial evaluation, it is essential to consider the rising trend of commercially available inhalants being used as recreational drugs. We present a case of a middle-aged man presenting with subacute neurotoxicity due to repeated abuse of ethyl chloride.

Effectiveness of precooling with ethyl chloride versus honey in alleviating intra-oral injection pain in adult patients: A randomized controlled trial.

Objective: The objective of the study was to assess and compare the effectiveness of precooling with ethyl chloride versus honey in alleviating the pain of dental injection. Methods: About 90 patients were recruited for this randomized controlled trial. In each of the following three groups, 30 patients were allocated: Group 1, precooling with ethyl chloride; Group 2, honey; and Group 3, control. The pain score of patients in each group was measured after injecting the dental local anesthesia using a visual analog scale. Paired t-test and multiple linear regression tests were used for statistical analysis. A p value of ⩽0.05 was considered to be as significant. Results: The mean pain scores of participants residing in different groups were as follows: Group 1: 2.83 ± 1.46, Group 2: 4.33 ± 1.62, and Group 3: 7.80. After administrating ethyl chloride, the majority of the 18 (60%) patients reported to suffer from "mild pain." Furthermore, in patients who were given honey in Group 2, most of the 21 (70%) patients reported suffering from "moderate pain." In Group 3 (control) where no anesthetic modality was used, the majority of the 25 (83.33%) patients experienced "severe pain." A significant difference was noted among the pain scores of three groups (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The administration of local anesthetic is part of almost all dental procedures. Precooling with ethyl chloride resulted in a greater reduction in pain scores than honey upon administration of local anesthesia injection.

Comparative clinical evaluation of two different formulated in-office newer desensitizing agents (Clinpro XT and Tokuyama Shield Force Plus) in reducing dentin hypersensitivity - A randomized clinical trial.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of two various in-office newer desensitizing agents in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity in patients with mild-to-moderate sensitivity for a 1-month follow-up. Materials and Methods: Forty subjects with cervical dentin hypersensitivity (otherwise healthy patients) were included. A split-mouth, randomized clinical trial was conducted. A Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to record the initial sensitivity levels at the baseline visit. Each individual has been exposed to thermal (ethyl chloride spray) and evaporative (air blast) stimuli to elicit sensitivity. A single application of two different in-office desensitizing agents, Clinpro XT Varnish (3M ESPE, Minnesota, USA) and Shield Force Plus (Tokuyama Dental, Tokyo, Japan), was done. The sensitivity scores were recorded after the application of the desensitizing agent immediately, after 1 week, and after 1 month using both air and cold stimuli in the same manner as initially. Results: Mean VAS scores represent teeth that were more sensitive to cold stimuli compared to air blasts in both groups. For both stimuli at all-time intervals except baseline, there is a significant difference between CXT and SFP, with low mean VAS scores for CXT. Post hoc analysis revealed that in the CXT group, there is a significant difference in mean VAS score between pre-and postintervention at all-time intervals except between immediate and 1-week time intervals (P < 0.001) but only at immediate and 1-week time intervals in SFP. Conclusion: Clinpro XT Varnish is more efficient compared to Shield Force Plus at all-time points irrespective of the stimuli after a 1-month follow-up.

Comparison of pain-reducing effect between topical ethyl chloride spray versus subcutaneous 1% lidocaine injection during two rods system contraceptive implant insertion: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of topical ethyl chloride spray (ECS) and subcutaneous 1% lidocaine injection (LI) to reduce pain during the two rods system insertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and ten women, who underwent two rods contraceptive implant insertion during January 2021 to July 2021, were enrolled and randomly allocated to ECS and 1% LI groups. After the skin was sterilized, the assigned anesthetic method was administered before insertion of two rods contraceptive implant using the standard procedure. Pain levels during; (1) the administering of the anesthetic, (2) the insertion of the implant, (3) at 20 min after insertion and (4) overall pain levels, were evaluated, using a 10 levels visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: All basic clinical characteristics between the two groups showed no significant difference. Mean VAS during anesthetic in the ECS group were significantly lower than in the LI group (3.92 and 2.89, mean difference -1.03, 95%CI -1.76 to -0.31, p < 0.01). However, the mean VAS during; (1) implant insertion, (2) 20 min after implant insertion and (3) overall pain, in the ECS group were significantly higher than in the LI group (4.83, 1.61, 3.11 versus 0.98, 0.09, 1.66) (mean difference 3.85, 1.52, 1.44 (95%CI 3.12 - 4.58, 1.13 - 1.92, 0.97 - 1.92, p < 0.01)). CONCLUSION: ECS should not be used solely as an anesthetic option for the two rods system of implant insertion. It provides for less pain during the administering of the anesthetic but significantly less analgesic effect than LI.

Sterility of Ethyl Chloride Spray After Use in the Clinic.

Background: Ethyl chloride spray is used frequently in the outpatient setting as a local anesthetic for injections and aspirations with varying consensus about the sterility of the spray. We hypothesize that ethyl chloride spray remains sterile and would show no bacterial growth during routine clinical use. Methods: Thirteen ethyl chloride bottles were collected for testing. Two unopened bottles were used as controls. Eleven unopened bottles were placed in orthopedic clinics and recollected after varying duration of use. The final volume and duration of use were recorded. Each bottle was sprayed in a separate test tube and allowed to evaporate. Trypticase soy broth was added to each tube and incubated for 48 hours. Control test tubes with broth alone were prepared and incubated under the same conditions. Cultures were evaluated at 24 and 48 hours. Results: The mean duration of ethyl chloride bottle use prior to culturing was 26 days. The average volume used per day was 1.9 mL. Each ethyl chloride bottle had an initial volume of 103.5 mL. Using the average daily volume usage, an extrapolated lifespan of each bottle was estimated at 7.7 weeks. None of the samples showed bacterial or fungal growth at 24 or 48 hours. Conclusion: Ethyl chloride bottles used in the clinical settings showed no bacterial or fungal contamination through their shelf life and routine use. The duration and amount of use did not affect sterility. Although the antimicrobial activity of ethyl chloride spray on skin is debated, ethyl chloride itself remains sterile through clinical use.

Inhaling muscle spray: A rising trend of abuse.

Ethyl chloride was popular as an inhalant recreational drug in the 1980s. It is easily available in pharmacies as well as sold online as a topical anesthetic spray for pain relief. In recent times, its use is gaining popularity again among the youth as an inhalant drug due to its neuro-stimulatory effects. To avoid the risks associated with use of illegal drugs, and ease of availability of ethyl chloride without restrictions, there is a rising trend to use it as a "substitute" drug of abuse. In this paper, we try to highlight to the critical care and emergency physicians that majority of these cases present with predominant neurological symptoms, with occasional involvement of the cardiovascular system. The diagnosis of ethyl chloride poisoning is primarily clinical and supportive care is the mainstay of treatment, along with subsequent counseling. Ethyl chloride abuse should be considered as a differential diagnosis in young patients presenting with predominant neurological symptoms. Alongside raising public awareness, the manufacturers and retail distributors of these products have an important role to play in reducing the risk of abuse.

Effectiveness of Different Techniques of Ethyl Chloride Spray for Venepuncture-Induced Pain: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Venepuncture is an essential component of anaesthesia services. However, this invites pain generating the first negative experience with anaesthesia. Hence, relief of this pain carries considerable importance. Efficacy of ethyl chloride spray although studied, there is no consensus for the best way of application. OBJECTIVES: The present study was conducted to find an effective technique/method of ethyl chloride spray application to reduce venepuncture pain. METHODS: Adult patients posted for different anaesthesia procedures were randomised into three groups. Venepuncture was done either after installation of distilled water or spray of ethyl chloride either once to twice. Venepuncture pain was assessed with a 0-100 Numeric Rating Scale. RESULTS: The analysis showed significant differences among the groups (F [2,96] = 66.27, P < 0.05). The twice sprayed group experienced the least pain ([mean ± standard deviation [SD]] 16.67 ± 10.21), lower in the once spray group ([mean ± SD] 27.58 ± 13.24), and the controls had the highest pain score ([mean ± SD] 49.09 ± 11.28). Post hoc Tukey's tests showed all the three groups differed significantly. The effect size was large, and the variability of the spray on the reduction of pain scores is 58% (η2 = 57.99). CONCLUSION: Ethyl chloride spray effectively reduces the pain on venepuncture, especially when the vapocoolant is sprayed twice each over 5 s, and from a distance of 5 cm perpendicular to the skin.

[Ethyl chloride aerosol spray for local anesthesia before arterial puncture: randomized placebo-controlled trial]. / Eficacia del cloruro de etilo en aerosol como anestésico local previo a la punción arterial: ensayo clínico aleatorizado controlado con placebo.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of an ethyl chloride aerosol spray to a placebo spray applied in the emergency department to the skin to reduce pain from arterial puncture for blood gas analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial in an emergency department of Hospital de Basurto in Bilbao, Spain. We included 126 patients for whom arterial blood gas analysis had been ordered. They were randomly assigned to receive application of the experimental ethyl chloride spray (n=66) or a placebo aerosol spray of a solution of alcohol in water (n=60). The assigned spray was applied just before arterial puncture. The main outcome variable was pain intensity reported on an 11-point numeric rating scale. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) pain level was 2 (1-5) in the experimental arm and 2 (1-4.5) in the placebo arm (P=.72). CONCLUSION: Topical application of an ethyl chloride spray did not reduce pain caused by arterial puncture.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la eficacia del cloruro de etilo en aerosol aplicado sobre la piel frente a placebo para disminuir el dolor provocado por una punción arterial durante la realización de una gasometría en el servicio de urgencias (SU). METODO: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado, simple ciego y controlado con placebo realizado en el SU del Hospital de Basurto (Bilbao, España). Se incluyeron 126 pacientes a los que se les había solicitado una gasometría arterial, asignándoles al azar al grupo de tratamiento tópico experimental con cloruro de etilo en aerosol (n = 66) o al grupo control con mezcla hidroalcohólica en aerosol (n = 60), ambos administrados inmediatamente antes de la punción arterial. La variable de resultado principal fue la intensidad del dolor autopercibido por el paciente medida por la escala NRS-11. RESULTADOS: El dolor percibido por el paciente tuvo una mediana (rango intercuartílico) de 2 (1-5) en el grupo tratado con cloruro de etilo y de 2 (1-4,5) en el grupo placebo (p = 0,72). CONCLUSIONES: La aplicación de cloruro de etilo tópico no reduce el dolor por punción arterial.

Prevention of pruritus with ethyl-chloride in skin prick test: a double-blind placebo-controlled prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Ethyl-chloride (EC) spray was recently shown to be an effective antipruritic agent, when given 15 min after histamine skin-prick test (SPT), without changing the wheal and flare reaction. We aimed to investigate the antipruritic effect of EC on SPT, when given prior to SPT. METHODS: A double-blind placebo-controlled prospective study. Overall, 44 volunteers underwent histamine SPT on both arms to trigger local pruritus. Prior to test, they were randomly treated with EC spray on one arm and saline spray (placebo) on the other. Subjects as well as researchers were blinded to the type of applied sprays. The wheal and flare reaction was measured after the SPT and subjects reported the intensity of pruritus following EC/placebo using a validated pruritus questionnaire (indexes 1-3) and a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Significant improvement in pruritus was reported following treatment with EC compared with placebo for all four studied parameters. Index 1 in EC 3.7 ± 2.3 versus 5 ± 3.5 (p = 0.007) in placebo, index 2 in EC 2.6 ± 2.1 versus 3.8 ± 2.8 (p = 0.002) in placebo, index 3 of EC 6.3 ± 3.8 versus 8.8 ± 5.8 (p = 0.03) and VAS in EC 3.7 ± 1.9 versus 4.4 ± 2.3 (p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between EC and placebo in terms of the wheal and flare indurations area. CONCLUSIONS: Ethyl-chloride has an effective antipruritic agent, when given before histamine SPT. Its use did not change the wheal and flare reaction, making it ideal for prevention of pruritus, secondary to allergy skin test, without masking the results.