Extravasation with methylthioninium chloride.

INTRODUCTION: Methylthioninium chloride is used for multiple treatment purposes and is sometimes administered through peripheral intravenous lines. We highlight the potential adverse effects of methylthioninium chloride extravasation during continuous peripheral intravenous administration. CASE SUMMARY: A 38-year-old woman presented to the emergency department with multifactorial hypovolemic and septic shock. She was treated with a continuous peripheral infusion of intravenous methylthioninium chloride for shock refractory to multiple vasopressors. IMAGES: One day after administration commenced, the patient developed blue staining of the left upper arm due to extravasation of methylthioninium chloride proximal to the site of infusion. Further images show its later spread. CONCLUSION: While reported cases of methylthioninium chloride extravasation are rare, it is our preference that methylthioninium chloride should be administered through a central line in cases of continuous infusion due to the risk of potential toxicity from extravasation.

Challenges with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonist initiation: a case series of semaglutide overdose administration errors.

BACKGROUND: Prescriptions of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist administered weekly for Type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity, are increasing. Adverse effects from semaglutide overdose are poorly described. We report adverse effects from three unintentional semaglutide overdoses upon initiation. CASE REPORTS: Case 1: A 53-year-old man unintentionally injected semaglutide 2 mg instead of the recommended 0.1 mg. Case 2: A 45-year-old woman unintentionally injected semaglutide 2.4 mg instead of 0.25 mg. Case 3: A 33-year-old woman injected semaglutide 1.7 mg. All three of these patients developed nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms. No patient experienced hypoglycemia. DISCUSSION: These unintentional semaglutide overdoses occurred due to deficits in patient and prescriber knowledge, and evasion of regulated access to pharmaceuticals. Nonspecific gastrointestinal symptoms predominated. The potential for hypoglycemia following glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist overdose is unclear, though it did not occur in our patients. It is thought that glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists are unlikely to cause hypoglycemia because their effects are glucose-dependent and diminish as serum glucose concentrations approach euglycemia. There is, however, an increase in hypoglycemia when glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists are combined with sulfonylureas. CONCLUSIONS: This case series highlights the critical role of patient education and training upon initiation of semaglutide therapy to minimize administration errors and adverse effects from injection of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists.

Retrospective evaluation of management guidelines for extracorporeal treatment of metformin poisoning.

INTRODUCTION: The Extracorporeal Treatments in Poisoning (EXTRIP) Workgroup defined criteria for extracorporeal toxin removal in patients with metformin poisoning. The primary objective of this study was to determine the benefit of extracorporeal toxin removal in patients meeting EXTRIP criteria. The secondary objective was to determine the performance characteristics of the EXTRIP criteria. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of metformin poisoned patients. Inclusion criteria were: suspicion of metformin poisoning with at least one of the following present: lactate concentration >5 mmol/L; pH < 7.35; or impaired kidney function. Patient data were extracted by reviewers who were unaware of the study hypothesis. Cases were analyzed based on EXTRIP criteria, whether extracorporeal toxin removal was performed, and survival. Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value were calculated with respect to the EXTRIP criteria and survival. RESULTS: Of 201 patients studied, 145 patients met recommended EXTRIP criteria (EXTRIP positive) and 56 patients did not (EXTRIP negative). Among patients who met recommended EXTRIP criteria, 96 received extracorporeal toxin removal and 49 did not. There was no difference in survival between these groups: 75.0% versus 73.5%, respectively (P >0.05). All 56 patients who did not meet EXTRIP criteria, survived (negative predictive value = 100%). DISCUSSION: The study did not demonstrate a survival benefit for extracorporeal toxin removal in those meeting EXTRIP criteria. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective analysis, the recommended EXTRIP criteria had a negative predictive value for death of 100%. Further study is needed to evaluate the benefit of extracorporeal toxin removal in patients meeting EXTRIP criteria for metformin poisoning.