Watkins Joseph W, Schwarz Evan S, Arroyo-Plasencia Anna M, Mullins Michael E
Division of Emergency Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, 660 S. Euclid Ave., Campus Box 8072, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA,
J Med Toxicol. 2015 Jun;11(2):179-84. doi: 10.1007/s13181-014-0452-x.
The anticholinergic toxidrome is well described and relatively common. Despite controversy, studies have shown that physostigmine is relatively safe and effective in reversing this toxidrome. We would expect toxicologists would be liberal in its use. We retrospectively analyzed data in the Toxicology Investigators Consortium (ToxIC) registry, representing data from medical toxicologists in multiple institutions nationwide, searching for patients who exhibited an anticholinergic toxidrome, determining what treatment(s) they received, and classifying the treatments as physostigmine, benzodiazepines, physostigmine and benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, or no definitive treatment. The causal agents of the toxidrome were as reported by the treating toxicologist. Eight hundred fifteen consecutive patients with anticholinergic toxidromes were analyzed. Benzodiazepines alone were given in 28.7 %, 12.4 % were given physostigmine alone, 8.8 % received both physostigmine and benzodiazepines, 2.7 % were given antipsychotics, and 47.4 % were given no definitive treatment. In patients who received only physostigmine, there was a significant difference in the rate of intubation (1.9 vs. 8.4 %, OR 0.21, 95 % CI 0.05-0.87) versus other treatment groups. Physostigmine was given at varying rates based on causative agent with use in agents with mixed or unknown effects (15.1 %) being significantly lower than those with primarily anticholinergic effects (26.6 %) (p < 0.001). Patients with anticholinergic toxicity were more likely to receive benzodiazepines than physostigmine. Those patients who received only physostigmine had a significantly lower rate of intubation. Physostigmine was more likely to be used with agents exerting primarily anticholinergic toxicity than in those agents with multiple actions.
抗胆碱能中毒综合征已有充分描述且相对常见。尽管存在争议,但研究表明毒扁豆碱在逆转这种中毒综合征方面相对安全有效。我们预计毒理学家会广泛使用它。我们回顾性分析了毒理学调查员联盟(ToxIC)登记处的数据,这些数据代表了全国多个机构中毒理学家的数据,寻找表现出抗胆碱能中毒综合征的患者,确定他们接受了何种治疗,并将治疗分类为毒扁豆碱、苯二氮䓬类药物、毒扁豆碱和苯二氮䓬类药物、抗精神病药物或未进行明确治疗。中毒综合征的致病药物由治疗毒理学家报告。对815例连续的抗胆碱能中毒综合征患者进行了分析。仅给予苯二氮䓬类药物的患者占28.7%,仅给予毒扁豆碱的患者占12.4%,同时接受毒扁豆碱和苯二氮䓬类药物的患者占8.8%,给予抗精神病药物的患者占2.7%,未进行明确治疗的患者占47.4%。在仅接受毒扁豆碱治疗的患者中,插管率与其他治疗组相比有显著差异(1.9%对8.4%,OR 0.21,95%CI 0.05 - 0.87)。根据致病药物的不同,毒扁豆碱的使用比例有所不同,在具有混合或不明作用的药物中使用比例(15.1%)显著低于主要具有抗胆碱能作用的药物(26.6%)(p < 0.001)。抗胆碱能中毒患者比接受毒扁豆碱更有可能接受苯二氮䓬类药物。那些仅接受毒扁豆碱治疗的患者插管率显著较低。与具有多种作用的药物相比,毒扁豆碱更有可能用于主要具有抗胆碱能毒性的药物。