Comparison of two types of polyvalent snake antivenom used in treatment
Abstract
Purpose: In this study; we aimed to compare the effectiveness of the two types of polyvalent snake antivenom and to determine the possible local and systemic reactions in patients who admitted to the emergency department with snake bite.
Materials and Methods: We performed this retrospective study on 30 patients who complained of snakebite. We grouped the patients according to the antivenom type (PoliseraTM or Polivalan TM) which they received. Demographic characteristics of the patients, vital signs, local tissue findings, and laboratory parameters were recorded in the standard data form. The following data were also recorded; the number of vials of snake antivenom used in each group, additional doses of venom were administered, and whether any local or systemic reaction to antivenom has developed or not.
Results: Thirty patients were included in the study. 16 patients were administered PoliseraTM (Group 1) snake antivenom and 14 patients were administered Polivalan TM (Group 2) snake antivenom. Patients in Group 1 were given an average of 9.1±7.3 vials, while patients in Group 2 were given an average of 11.6±12.7 vials. More allergic reactions-urticaria, fever, and cellulite were observed in the group receiving PolivalanTM antivenom.
Conclusion: Different methodologies arising from the production of antivenom, pyrogen contamination, and differences in packaging can cause different effects and side effects even in products with the same dose and antivenom content.
Keywords
Kaynakça
- Bilir Ö. Sürüngenler. Klinik Toksikoloji Tanı ve Tedavi. (Editörler: Satar S, Yürümez Y, Güneysel Ö, Türedi S, Akıcı A) 1. Baskı, Antalya, Çukurova Nobel Tıp Kitabevi, 2020, p: 1011-1018. ISBN: 978-605-2369-22-7.
- Warrell DA, Venomous Bites, Stings, and Poisoning: An Update. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2019; 33:17–38
- Aslan N, Yıldızdaş D, Horoz ÖÖ, Ekinci F, Arslan D, Bilen S ,Yilmaz HL. The relationship between neutrophil lymphocyte ratio and clinical outcomes after snakebite in pediatric patients. Cukurova Medical Journal 44 (2019 ): 1040-1045
- Okur Mİ, Yıldırım AM, Köse R. Türkiye’de Zehirli Yılan Isırmaları ve Tedavisi. Türkiye Klinikleri Tıp bilimleri Dergisi 2001; 21:21-4.
- Kara ME, Ay MO, Seğmen S, Avcı A, İçme F, Gökel Y. Management of snake bites. Archives Medical Review Journal. 2014;23:272–92.
- David Warrell. Snakebites. World Health Organization, Guidelines for the management of snakebites. 2nd Edition. WHO/Regional Office for South-East Asia. August 2016 140 p. ISBN 978 92 9022 530 0.
- Altun D, Altun D, Ayaz B. Our Clinical Experiences in Snake Bites. J Turk Soc Intens Care 2016;14:100-4.
- Gümüştekin M, Sarıçoban B, Gürkan MA. Antivenoms and principles of application. J DEU Med 2019;34(1):73-83.
- Product information of Polisera Vial Containing Injectable Solution Against Snakebites. Date of access: 10.05.2020 Access web address: http://www.vetalserum.com.tr/panel/images/dosyalar/poliserakub.pdf
- Scharman EJ, Noffsinger VD. Copperhead snakebites: Clinical severity of local effects. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:55-61.
