Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Med Toxicol ; 16(1): 12-16, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31823333

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Bupropion is the only Food and Drug Administration-approved synthetic cathinone. It increases the release of norepinephrine in the locus coeruleus and dorsal raphe nucleus, causing an increase in the frequency of serotonergic neuron firing. The diagnosis of serotonin toxicity (ST) from bupropion poisoning is controversial due to the lack of direct serotonergic activity. Nonetheless, there is one documented report of ST after single-agent bupropion overdose and multiple reports describing polypharmacy overdoses where bupropion may have contributed to ST. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of data collected by the Toxicology Investigators Consortium (ToxIC), a prospective multi-center toxico-surveillance and research network registry, from 2014 to 2017. Cases were identified if ST was a clinical effect and bupropion was the single agent listed. Data is presented descriptively. RESULTS: Of the 266 recorded single bupropion overdoses, the most common symptoms were seizures (47.1%), tachycardia (greater than 140 bpm) (33.9%), agitation (31.7%), toxic psychosis (20.4%), and myoclonus/tremor/hyperreflexia (19%). Benzodiazepines were the most common therapy (69.2%). Thirteen patients (5.9%) were diagnosed with ST by a medical toxicologist. CONCLUSION: Bupropion overdose is primarily associated with seizures, tachycardia, and agitation; bupropion may be an atypical cause of serotonin toxicity.

2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 68(46): 1081-1086, 2019 Nov 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31751322

RESUMEN

CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), state and local health departments, and public health and clinical stakeholders are investigating a nationwide outbreak of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) (1). CDC has published recommendations for health care providers regarding EVALI (2-4). Recently, researchers from Utah and New York published proposed diagnosis and treatment algorithms for EVALI (5,6). EVALI remains a diagnosis of exclusion because, at present, no specific test or marker exists for its diagnosis, and evaluation should be guided by clinical judgment. Because patients with EVALI can experience symptoms similar to those associated with influenza or other respiratory infections (e.g., fever, cough, headache, myalgias, or fatigue), it might be difficult to differentiate EVALI from influenza or community-acquired pneumonia on initial assessment; EVALI might also co-occur with respiratory infections. This report summarizes recommendations for health care providers managing patients with suspected or known EVALI when respiratory infections such as influenza are more prevalent in the community than they have been in recent months (7). Recommendations include 1) asking patients with respiratory, gastrointestinal, or constitutional symptoms about the use of e-cigarette, or vaping, products; 2) evaluating those suspected to have EVALI with pulse oximetry and obtaining chest imaging, as clinically indicated; 3) considering outpatient management for clinically stable EVALI patients who meet certain criteria; 4) testing patients for influenza, particularly during influenza season, and administering antimicrobials, including antivirals, in accordance with established guidelines; 5) using caution when considering prescribing corticosteroids for outpatients, because this treatment modality has not been well studied among outpatients, and corticosteroids could worsen respiratory infections; 6) recommending evidence-based treatment strategies, including behavioral counseling, to help patients discontinue using e-cigarette, or vaping, products; and 7) emphasizing the importance of annual influenza vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months, including patients who use e-cigarette, or vaping products.


Asunto(s)
Brotes de Enfermedades , Lesión Pulmonar/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Vapeo/efectos adversos , Humanos , Lesión Pulmonar/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
4.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 68(41): 919-927, 2019 10 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31633675

RESUMEN

CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), state and local health departments, and public health and clinical partners are investigating a multistate outbreak of lung injury associated with the use of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette), or vaping, products. In late August, CDC released recommendations for health care providers regarding e-cigarette, or vaping, product use associated lung injury (EVALI) based on limited data from the first reported cases (1,2). This report summarizes national surveillance data describing clinical features of more recently reported cases and interim recommendations based on these data for U.S. health care providers caring for patients with suspected or known EVALI. It provides interim guidance for 1) initial clinical evaluation; 2) suggested criteria for hospital admission and treatment; 3) patient follow-up; 4) special considerations for groups at high risk; and 5) clinical and public health recommendations. Health care providers evaluating patients suspected to have EVALI should ask about the use of e-cigarette, or vaping, products in a nonjudgmental and thorough manner. Patients suspected to have EVALI should have a chest radiograph (CXR), and hospital admission is recommended for patients who have decreased blood oxygen (O2) saturation (<95%) on room air or who are in respiratory distress. Health care providers should consider empiric use of a combination of antibiotics, antivirals, or steroids based upon clinical context. Evidence-based tobacco product cessation strategies, including behavioral counseling, are recommended to help patients discontinue use of e-cigarette, or vaping, products. To reduce the risk of recurrence, patients who have been treated for EVALI should not use e-cigarette, or vaping, products. CDC recommends that persons should not use e-cigarette, or vaping, products that contain tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). At present, CDC recommends persons consider refraining from using e-cigarette, or vaping, products that contain nicotine. Irrespective of the ongoing investigation, e-cigarette, or vaping, products should never be used by youths, young adults, or women who are pregnant. Persons who do not currently use tobacco products should not start using e-cigarette, or vaping, products.


Asunto(s)
Brotes de Enfermedades , Sistemas Electrónicos de Liberación de Nicotina , Lesión Pulmonar/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Vapeo/efectos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Lesión Pulmonar/epidemiología , Lesión Pulmonar/mortalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 68(36): 787-790, 2019 Sep 13.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31513561

RESUMEN

On September 6, 2019, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr). As of August 27, 2019, 215 possible cases of severe pulmonary disease associated with the use of electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) products (e.g., devices, liquids, refill pods, and cartridges) had been reported to CDC by 25 state health departments. E-cigarettes are devices that produce an aerosol by heating a liquid containing various chemicals, including nicotine, flavorings, and other additives (e.g., propellants, solvents, and oils). Users inhale the aerosol, including any additives, into their lungs. Aerosols produced by e-cigarettes can contain harmful or potentially harmful substances, including heavy metals such as lead, volatile organic compounds, ultrafine particles, cancer-causing chemicals, or other agents such as chemicals used for cleaning the device (1). E-cigarettes also can be used to deliver tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the principal psychoactive component of cannabis, or other drugs; for example, "dabbing" involves superheating substances that contain high concentrations of THC and other plant compounds (e.g., cannabidiol) with the intent of inhaling the aerosol. E-cigarette users could potentially add other substances to the devices. This report summarizes available information and provides interim case definitions and guidance for reporting possible cases of severe pulmonary disease. The guidance in this report reflects data available as of September 6, 2019; guidance will be updated as additional information becomes available.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Pulmonares/epidemiología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Vapeo/efectos adversos , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
6.
Clin Ther ; 41(6): 1020-1028, 2019 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31084993

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate potential differences by sex in the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients treated utilizing a sepsis electronic bundle order set. Risk factors for in-hospital mortality were also assessed. METHODS: Data on patients in whom the sepsis order set was initiated in the emergency department over a 16-month period were entered into the hospital database. Data were analyzed for differences by sex in demographic and clinical factors, treatment modalities, and in-hospital mortality. The Bonferroni correction was applied to account for multiple comparisons; α was set at 0.006 for sex differences. FINDINGS: A total of 2204 patients were included. Male and female cohorts were similar with regard to a variety of demographic and clinical factors, including age, Emergency Severity Index (ESI) levels 1 and 2, time to disposition, appropriateness of antibiotics, and total fluids given by weight. The ESI is an assessment score ranging from 1 to 5 (1 is emergent). There were modest differences in the source of infection (genitourinary was 4% more common in women; P = 0.03) and mode of arrival (men were 4% more likely to arrive by ambulance; P = 0.03). These differences did not achieve our predefined α of 0.006 when the Bonferroni correction was applied. Factors associated with in-hospital mortality were advanced age, arrival by ambulance, and an ESI level of 1 or 2 (all, P < 0.01). IMPLICATIONS: Women were more likely to have a genitourinary cause of sepsis and less likely to arrive by ambulance. Risk factors of in-hospital mortality were older age, arrival by ambulance, and an ESI level of 1 or 2, but not sex.

7.
Case Rep Emerg Med ; 2019: 9301432, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30956824

RESUMEN

Massive acetaminophen (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol; APAP) ingestion is characterized by a rapid onset of mitochondrial dysfunction, including metabolic acidosis, lactemia, and altered mental status without hepatotoxicity which may not respond to the standard doses of N-acetylcysteine (NAC). A 64-year-old woman without medical history presented comatose after an ingestion of 208 tablets of Tylenol PM™ (APAP 500 mg and diphenhydramine 25 mg). The initial APAP concentration measured 1,017 µg/mL (therapeutic range 10-30 µg/mL), and elevated anion gap metabolic acidosis, lactemia, and 5-oxoprolinemia were detected. High-dose intravenous (IV) NAC, 4-methylpyrazole (4-MP), and hemodialysis (HD) were initiated. She was transferred to a liver transplant center and continued both NAC and HD therapies until complete resolution of metabolic acidosis and coma without developing hepatitis. She was discharged without sequelae. This is the fourth highest APAP concentration recorded in a surviving patient. Moreover, this is the first report of a novel "triple therapy" using NAC, 4-MP, and HD in the setting of massive APAP ingestion that presents with coma, elevated anion gap metabolic acidosis, and lactemia. Emergency physicians should recognize these critically ill patients and consider high-dose NAC, 4-MP, and HD to be initiated in the emergency department (ED).

8.
Clin Ther ; 40(2): 214-223.e5, 2018 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29371005

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the current attitudes, perceptions, and practices of emergency medicine providers and nurses (RNs) regarding the discharge of adult patients from the emergency department (ED) after administration of opioid analgesics. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered at 3 hospital sites with a combined annual ED census of >180,000 visits per year. All 59 attending emergency physicians (EPs), 233 RNs, and 23 advanced practice clinicians (APCs) who worked at these sites were eligible to participate. FINDINGS: Thirty-five EPs (59.3%), 88 RNs (37.8%), and 14 APCs (60.9%) completed the survey for an overall response rate of 51.75%. Most respondents were female (95 [69.9%]). The factor ranked most important to consider when discharging a patient from the ED after administration of opioids was the patient's functional status and vital signs (median, 2.00; interquartile range, 2.00-3.50). More RNs (84 [96.6%]) than EPs (29 [82.9%]) reported that developing an ED policy or guideline for safe discharge after administration of opioids is important to clinical practice (P = 0.02). Only 8 physicians (23.5%) reported that they did not prescribe intramuscular morphine, and 15 (42.9%) reported that they did not prescribe intramuscular hydromorphone. EPs (7 [20.0%]) and RNs (3 [3.4%]) differed in regard to whether they were aware if any patients to whom they administered an opioid had experienced an adverse drug-related event (P = 0.01). Most EPs (24 [68.6%]) and RNs (54 [61.4%]) believed that the decision for patient discharge should be left to both the emergency medicine provider and the RN. IMPLICATIONS: Most study participants believed that developing a policy or guideline for safe discharge after administration opioids in the ED is important to clinical practice. Only a few physicians reported that they did not prescribe intramuscular hydromorphone or morphine. Most participants believed the discharge decision after administration of opioids in the ED should be primarily determined by both the emergency medicine provider and the RN.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides/administración & dosificación , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Alta del Paciente , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudios Transversales , Medicina de Emergencia , Femenino , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Hidromorfona/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Morfina/administración & dosificación , Percepción , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA