Effect of delayed activated charcoal on acetaminophen concentration after simulated overdose of oxycodone and acetaminophen

Systematic review on the use of activated charcoal for gastrointestinal decontamination following acute oral overdose

INTRODUCTION

The use of activated charcoal in poisoning remains both a pillar of modern toxicology and a source of debate. Following the publication of the joint position statements on the use of single-dose and multiple-dose activated charcoal by the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology and the European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists, the routine use of activated charcoal declined. Over subsequent years, many new pharmaceuticals became available in modified or alternative-release formulations and additional data on gastric emptying time in poisoning was published, challenging previous assumptions about absorption kinetics. The American Academy of Clinical Toxicology, the European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists and the Asia Pacific Association of Medical Toxicology founded the Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative to create a framework for evidence-based recommendations for the management of poisoned patients. The activated charcoal workgroup of the Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative was tasked with reviewing systematically the evidence pertaining to the use of activated charcoal in poisoning in order to update the previous recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was: Does oral activated charcoal given to adults or children prevent toxicity or improve clinical outcome and survival of poisoned patients compared to those who do not receive charcoal?  Secondary objectives were to evaluate pharmacokinetic outcomes, the role of cathartics, and adverse events to charcoal administration. This systematic review summarizes the available evidence on the efficacy of activated charcoal.

METHODS

A medical librarian created a systematic search strategy for Medline (Ovid), subsequently translated for Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), BIOSIS Previews (via Ovid), Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library/DARE. All databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2019. There were no language limitations.  One author screened all citations identified in the search based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Excluded citations were confirmed by an additional author and remaining articles were obtained in full text and evaluated by at least two authors for inclusion. All authors cross-referenced full-text articles to identify articles missed in the searches. Data from included articles were extracted by the authors on a standardized spreadsheet and two authors used the GRADE methodology to independently assess the quality and risk of bias of each included study.

RESULTS

From 22,950 titles originally identified, the final data set consisted of 296 human studies, 118 animal studies, and 145 in vitro studies. Also included were 71 human and two animal studies that reported adverse events. The quality was judged to have a Low or Very Low GRADE in 469 (83%) of the studies. Ninety studies were judged to be of Moderate or High GRADE. The higher GRADE studies reported on the following drugs: paracetamol (acetaminophen), phenobarbital, carbamazepine, cardiac glycosides (digoxin and oleander), ethanol, iron, salicylates, theophylline, tricyclic antidepressants, and valproate. Data on newer pharmaceuticals not reviewed in the previous American Academy of Clinical Toxicology/European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists statements such as quetiapine, olanzapine, citalopram, and Factor Xa inhibitors were included. No studies on the optimal dosing for either single-dose or multiple-dose activated charcoal were found. In the reviewed clinical data, the time of administration of the first dose of charcoal was beyond one hour in 97% (n = 1006 individuals), beyond two hours in 36% (n = 491 individuals), and beyond 12 h in 4% (n = 43 individuals) whereas the timing of the first dose in controlled studies was within one hour of ingestion in 48% (n = 2359 individuals) and beyond two hours in 36% (n = 484) of individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found heterogenous data. The higher GRADE data was focused on a few select poisonings, while studies that addressed patients with unknown and or mixed ingestions were hampered by low rates of clinically meaningful toxicity or death.  Despite these limitations, they reported a benefit of activated charcoal beyond one hour in many clinical scenarios.

Clinical Effects of Activated Charcoal Unavailability on Treatment Outcomes for Oral Drug Poisoned Patients

Background

Activated charcoal is the most frequently and widely used oral decontaminating agent in emergency departments (EDs). However, there is some debate about its clinical benefits and risks. In Korea, activated charcoal with sorbitol was unavailable as of the mid-2015, and our hospital had been unable to use it from September 2015. This study examined the differences of clinical features and outcomes of patients during the periods charcoal was and was not available.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who had visited an urban tertiary academic ED for oral drug poisoning between January 2013 and January 2017.

Results

For the charcoal-available period, 413 patients were identified and for the charcoal-unavailable period, 221. Activated charcoal was used in the treatment of 141 patients (34%) during the available period. The mortality rates during the available and unavailable periods were 1.9 and 0.9%, respectively (p = 0.507). There was also no interperiod difference in the development of aspiration pneumonia (9.9 versus 9.5%, p = 0.864), the endotracheal intubation rate (8.4 versus 7.2%, p = 0.586), and vasopressor use (5.3 versus 5.0%, p = 0.85). Intensive care unit (ICU) admission was higher in the unavailable period (5.8 versus 13.6%, p = 0.001). ICU days were lower in the unavailable period (10 [4.5-19] versus 4 [3-9], p = 0.01). Hospital admission (43.3 versus 29.9%, p = 0.001) was lower in the unavailable period.

Conclusions

In this single center study, there appeared to be no difference in mortality, intubation rates, or vasopressor use between the charcoal-available and charcoal-unavailable periods.

Effect of Catnip Charcoal on the In Vivo Pharmacokinetics of the Main Alkaloids of Rhizoma Coptidis

This study aims to explore the effect of catnip Nepeta cataria (CNC) charcoal on the pharmacokinetics of the main alkaloids of Rhizoma Coptidis in vivo. Twenty-four rabbits were randomly divided into four groups and given oral administration of an aqueous extract of Rhizoma Coptidis (RCAE), RCAE plus CNC, RCAE plus activated carbon (AC), or distilled water, respectively. Plasma samples were collected after administration. The concentrations of berberine, coptisine, palmatine, and epiberberine in plasma were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The pharmacokinetics data were calculated using pharmacokinetic DAS 2.0 software. The results showed that the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of berberine increased, while the AUC of coptisine, palmatine, and epiberberine decreased in the rabbits that received RCAE plus CNC. Meanwhile, the AUC of berberine, coptisine, palmatine, and epiberberine decreased in the group given RCAE plus AC. The difference of main pharmacokinetics parameters among the four groups was significant (P < 0.05). This study showed that CNC improved the bioavailability of berberine in comparison to AC and prolonged its release in comparison to RCAE alone. However, it decreased the bioavailability of coptisine, palmatine, and epiberberine. In comparison, AC uniformly declined the bioavailability of berberine, coptisine, palmatine, and epiberberine.

Does prearrival communication from a poison center to an emergency department decrease time to activated charcoal for pediatric poisoning?

OBJECTIVE

A poison center plays an important role in directing appropriate care, which is critical in reducing morbidity due to poisoning. Activated charcoal (AC) is one intervention for some poisonings. This study examined whether children with a poisoning who were preannounced by a poison center received AC earlier than patients without a referral.

METHODS

A retrospective review of AC administration in children aged 0 to 18 years in a pediatric emergency department (ED) from 2000 to 2006 was performed. Abstracted covariates were poison center referral status, age, sex, acuity, disposition, transportation mode, triage time, and time of AC administration. Analysis of variance controlling for covariates tested the equality of mean time intervals between the groups with and without a poison center referral.

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-one cases met the inclusion criteria. One hundred thirty-five (39%) were male. Eighty cases (23%) had a poison center referral. Time from triage to charcoal administration for patients with a poison center referral was a mean of 59 (SD, 34) minutes. Time for the group without a referral was a mean of 71 (SD, 43) minutes (P = 0.0036).

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced communication from a poison center was associated with earlier administration of AC in the ED for this population. Nevertheless, the duration to charcoal administration was frequently suboptimal. Triage and prehospital practices should be reexamined to improve timeliness of AC when indicated and consider exclusion of administration if beyond an appropriate time frame. Advanced notification should be the paradigm for all poison centers, and early response protocols for poison center referrals should be used by EDs.

Gastrointestinal decontamination in the acutely poisoned patient

Objective

To define the role of gastrointestinal (GI) decontamination of the poisoned patient.

Data Sources

A computer-based PubMed/MEDLINE search of the literature on GI decontamination in the poisoned patient with cross referencing of sources.

Study Selection and Data Extraction

Clinical, animal and in vitro studies were reviewed for clinical relevance to GI decontamination of the poisoned patient.

Data Synthesis

The literature suggests that previously, widely used, aggressive approaches including the use of ipecac syrup, gastric lavage, and cathartics are now rarely recommended. Whole bowel irrigation is still often recommended for slow-release drugs, metals, and patients who "pack" or "stuff" foreign bodies filled with drugs of abuse, but with little quality data to support it. Activated charcoal (AC), single or multiple doses, was also a previous mainstay of GI decontamination, but the utility of AC is now recognized to be limited and more time dependent than previously practiced. These recommendations have resulted in several treatment guidelines that are mostly based on retrospective analysis, animal studies or small case series, and rarely based on randomized clinical trials.

Conclusions

The current literature supports limited use of GI decontamination of the poisoned patient.