SynthesisDrug safety2011
Effect of pre-medication on early adverse reactions following antivenom use in snakebite: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of snake antivenom in the Region of the Americas: a systematic review.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025Pooled it
- Outcomes in intervention research on snakebite envenomation: a systematic review.F1000Research · 2022Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of a freeze-dried trivalent antivenom for snakebites in the Brazilian Amazon: An open randomized controlled phase IIb clinical trial.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2017Trial
- A randomised controlled trial of two infusion rates to decrease reactions to antivenom.PloS one · 2012Trial
- The Chinese guideline for management of snakebites.World journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Snake Envenomation.The New England journal of medicine · 2022Review
- Hydrocortisone for Preventing Adverse Drug Reactions to Snake Antivenom: A Meta-Analysis.Emergency medicine international · 2022Article
- A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020).Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Clinical management of snakebite envenoming: Future perspectives.Toxicon: X · 2021Article
- Control of snakebite envenoming: A mathematical modeling study.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- Interventions for the management of snakebite envenoming: An overview of systematic reviews.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Review
- Antivenom therapy: efficacy of premedication for the prevention of adverse reactions.The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2018Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Antivenoms for Snakebite Envenoming in 16 Countries in West Africa.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2016Article
- Cost-effectiveness of antivenoms for snakebite envenoming in Nigeria.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2015Article
- Adverse drug reaction profile of anti-snake venom in a rural tertiary care teaching hospital.Journal of young pharmacists : JYP · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.