ArticleInternational journal of critical illness and injury science
Role of extracorporeal therapy in poisoning - A case based narrative.
Article in International journal of critical illness and injury science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Extracorporeal treatment (ECTR) have been employed for poison elimination dating back to as early as the 1960s, but during the current day and time, the indications for ECTR are mostly arbitrary and are considered when other treatments of poison elimination or reduction below toxic levels are not available. It is invaluable, especially when the toxins or poison are amendable to removal by ECTR, especially in a setting of clinical deterioration, the unavailability of specific antidotes, or when other treatment modalities are cost prohibitive in a tertiary setting with ECTR facilities. Objective: To reiterate the efficacy of extracorporeal therapy techniques in poisoning focusing on the indications, available modalities, and outcomes. Methods: Three clinical cases of acute poisoning with phenobarbitone, copper sulfate, and snake envenomation, effectively managed by ECTR, in detail were reviewed. A literature review on ECTR in poisoning was also conducted to summarize the principles. Results: All three patients were managed with appropriate ECTR modalities. Therapeutic plasma exchange was used to treat snakebite-induced thrombotic microangiopathy, hemodialysis was used to treat phenobarbital toxicity, and plasma exchange was used effectively for copper sulfate poisoning. ECTR was initiated early, which resulted in clinical improvement and recovery in all cases. Conclusion: HD remains a pivotal treatment option for the management of severe poisonings. Nevertheless, given the rare possibility of an encounter with cases necessitating treatment with extracorporeal therapies and the lack of recommendations and guidelines to standardize the practice, the evidence supporting the application of ECTR still remains limited and needs to be studied further for high-quality evidence.
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.