Syed Sumaya, Gurcoo Showkat Ahmad, Farooqui Ayaz Khalid, Nisa Waqarul, Sofi Khalid, Wani Tariq M
Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Sheri Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Soura, Srinagar, Kashmir, India.
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Saudi J Anaesth. 2015 Jan;9(1):49-54. doi: 10.4103/1658-354X.146306.
Organophosphorus poisoning (OPP) is a major global public health problem. Pralidoxime has been used in a complimentary role to atropine for the management of OPP. World Health Organization (WHO) recommends use of pralidoxime but studies regarding its role have been inconclusive, ranging from being ineffective to harmful or beneficial.
The present study was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of pralidoxime. Eddleston's study was the most compelling factor for our study, as he showed worst outcomes using pralidoxime. Our practice of continuous use of pralidoxime was based on the WHO guidelines and the study by Pawar (2006), which showed better outcome with higher doses of pralidoxime. These conflicting results suggested that a re-evaluation of its use in our clinical practice was indicated.
There was no difference in mortality rates, hemodynamic parameters and atropine requirements between the AP and A groups. Mean duration of ventilation (3.6 ± 4.6 in AP group vs. 3.6 ± 4.4 in A group) and Intensive Care Unit stay (7.1 ± 5.4 in AP group vs. 6.8 ± 4.7 in A group) was comparable. Serum sodium concentrations showed a correlation with mortality, with lower concentrations associated with better outcomes.
The study suggests that add-on WHO-recommended pralidoxime therapy does not provide any benefit over atropine monotherapy. Adding pralidoxime does not seem to be beneficial and at the same time does not result in increased mortality rates. Our practice changed after completion of this study, and it has proven to be of significant benefit to patients who had to bear the expense of treatment.
有机磷中毒(OPP)是一个重大的全球公共卫生问题。解磷定已被用于辅助阿托品治疗有机磷中毒。世界卫生组织(WHO)建议使用解磷定,但关于其作用的研究尚无定论,其效果从无效到有害或有益不等。
本研究旨在评估解磷定的有效性。埃德斯通的研究是我们开展本研究的最具说服力的因素,因为他的研究表明使用解磷定的结果最差。我们持续使用解磷定的做法是基于WHO指南以及帕瓦尔(2006年)的研究,该研究表明高剂量解磷定有更好的治疗效果。这些相互矛盾的结果表明,有必要对其在我们临床实践中的使用进行重新评估。
AP组和A组在死亡率、血流动力学参数和阿托品需求量方面没有差异。平均通气时间(AP组为3.6±4.6,A组为3.6±4.4)和重症监护病房住院时间(AP组为7.1±5.4,A组为6.8±4.7)具有可比性。血清钠浓度与死亡率相关,浓度较低与较好的治疗效果相关。
该研究表明,在阿托品单一疗法基础上加用WHO推荐的解磷定治疗并无任何益处。加用解磷定似乎没有益处,同时也不会导致死亡率增加。本研究完成后我们改变了做法,事实证明这对那些承担治疗费用有困难的患者有显著益处。