Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21879781›Full record

SynthesisDrug safety2011

Effect of pre-medication on early adverse reactions following antivenom use in snakebite: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abdulrazaq G Habib

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drug safety, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. The Chinese guideline for management of snakebites.World journal of emergency medicine · 2024
    Article
  6. Snake Envenomation.The New England journal of medicine · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Antivenom therapy: efficacy of premedication for the prevention of adverse reactions.The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2018
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abdulrazaq G HabibInfectious and Tropical Diseases Unit, Department of Medicine, Bayero University Kano, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Nigeria. abdulrazaq_habib@yahoo.co.uk
Bayero University Kano · NG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPre-medication has been used to protect against early adverse reactions (EAR) following antivenom administration after snakebite. Studies have evaluated its efficacy with variable results.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data to assess the effect of pre-medication on the risk of EAR.

methodsWe conducted a search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database and various search engines/websites, searched handbooks, book chapters and peer-reviewed articles relating to clinical snakebite, and consulted experts in this field. The search was on published literature up to September 2010. A meta-analysis was conducted of all randomized and non-randomized studies of EAR following antivenom in snakebite that utilized either adrenaline (epinephrine)-containing or non-adrenaline (antihistamines, corticosteroids)-containing pre-medications compared with control groups. We performed either random- or fixed-effects analysis based on the presence of heterogeneity as assessed with two tests, including the I2 statistic, and performed restricted analyses on data derived from randomized or non-randomized studies. Sensitivity analysis investigating the influence of single studies on overall estimates was conducted and we determined publication bias where detected in both of the two tests used for its assessment.

resultsThree randomized and four non-randomized studies were selected for inclusion in this study. When all ten comparisons from the seven selected studies were combined (with a total of 434 subjects in the pre-medication groups and 399 subjects in the control groups), the overall summary risk ratio (RR) for EAR was 0.70 (95% CI 0.50, 0.99; p = 0.041; I ²= 66.5%). When analysis was restricted to only studies employing adrenaline-containing pre-medication, the combined summary RR was 0.32 (95% CI 0.18, 0.58; p < 0.0001; I² = 9.5%). Results were not statistically significant when analyses were restricted to studies employing non-adrenaline-containing pre-medications, or cohort or randomized controlled designs. Analysis was limited by heterogeneity, paucity and quality of data.

conclusionsFindings are consistent with a substantial beneficial effect of adrenaline pre-medication, but a marginal benefit with the combination of pre-medications used against EAR could not be excluded. Future studies are recommended and they should explore possible synergism of broader combinations of drugs and effects of mode of antivenom administration in large randomized controlled trials. Meanwhile, highly purified antivenoms with less risk of EAR should be made available in the rural tropics.

Indexed as

AntiveninsClinical Trials as TopicDrug Therapy, CombinationHumansImmunologic FactorsSnake BitesTime FactorsAntiveninsImmunologic Factors

Identifiers

PMID21879781
OpenAlexW153214317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.