Dataset Information

Evaluation of cut-off values in acute paracetamol overdose following the United Kingdom guidelines.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The United Kingdom guideline for acute paracetamol overdose has recommended the use of '100-treatment line'. Emergency medical centers in some developing countries lack the resources for timely reporting of paracetamol concentrations, hence treatment depends on reported dose. This study aimed to examine whether using an reported dose is safe to predict concentration above the 100-line.

Methods

Data were retrieved from two emergency medical centers retrospectively, between 2010 and 2017. The inclusion criteria were single acute paracetamol overdose, presentation within 15 h, and age ≥ 14 years. Multiple linear regression was performed to determine the effect of ingested dose on paracetamol concentration. Subgroups were created based on ingested dose, rate of concentration above 100-line were investigated.

Results

One hundred and seventy-two patients were enrolled in the primary analysis; median dose was 133.3 mg/kg and 46 (37.8%) had concentration above 100-line in the first test. Only dose per weight was moderately correlated with the first concentration (R² = 0.410, p < 0.001). In the ≤200 mg/kg ingestion group, 18 patients showed concentration above 100-line and 8 showed acute liver injury. The cut-off value of 150 mg/kg showed 82.6% sensitivity and 73.8% specificity to predict concentration above 100-line.

Conclusion

Where paracetamol concentration is not available and activated charcoal is readily used, following United Kingdom guideline, it is safe to use an ingested dose of > 150 mg/kg as the cut-off value for N-acetylcysteine treatment with risk stratification for hepatotoxicity if the patient is ≥14 years and visit the ED within 15 h after an acute paracetamol overdose.

SUBMITTER: Jeong HH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8734297 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This is the official guideline endorsed by the specialty associations involved in the care of head and neck cancer patients in the UK. Significantly new data have been published on laryngeal cancer management since the last edition of the guidelines. This paper discusses the evidence base pertaining to the management of laryngeal cancer and provides updated recommendations on management for this group of patients receiving cancer care. Recommendations • Radiotherapy (RT) and transoral laser microsurgery (TLM) are accepted treatment options for T1a-T2a glottic carcinoma. (R) • Open partial surgery may have a role in the management of selected tumours. (R) • Radiotherapy, TLM and transoral robotic surgery are reasonable treatment options for T1-T2 supraglottic carcinoma. (R) • Supraglottic laryngectomy may have a role in the management of selected tumours. (R) • Most patients with T2b-T3 glottic cancers are suitable for non-surgical larynx preservation therapies. (R) • Concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be regarded as the standard of care for non-surgical management. (R) • Subject to the availability of appropriate surgical expertise and multi-disciplinary rehabilitation services, TLM or open partial surgical procedures ± post-operative RT, may be also be appropriate in selected cases. (R) • In the absence of clinical or radiological evidence of nodal disease, elective treatment (RT or surgery ± post-operative RT) is recommended to at least lymph node levels II, III and IV bilaterally. In node positive disease, it is recommended that lymph node levels II-V should be treated on the involved side. If level II nodes are involved, then elective irradiation of ipsilateral level Ib nodes may be considered. (R) • Most patients with T3 supraglottic cancers are suitable for non-surgical larynx preservation therapies. (R) • Concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be regarded as the standard of care for non-surgical management. (R) • Subject to the availability of appropriate surgical expertise and multi-disciplinary rehabilitation services, TLM or open partial surgical procedures ± post-operative RT, may also be appropriate in selected cases. (R) • In the absence of clinical or radiological evidence of nodal disease, elective treatment (RT or surgery ± post-operative RT) is recommended to at least lymph node levels II, III and IV bilaterally. In node positive disease, lymph node levels II-V should be treated on the involved side. (R) • As per the PET-Neck clinical trial, patients with N2 or N3 neck disease who undergo treatment with chemoradiotherapy to their laryngeal primary and experience a complete response with a subsequent negative post-treatment positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET-CT) scan do not require an elective neck dissection. In contrast, patients who have a partial response to treatment or have increased uptake on a post-treatment PET-CT scan should have a neck dissection. (R) • Larynx preservation with concurrent chemoradiotherapy should be considered for T4 tumours, unless there is tumour invasion through cartilage into the soft tissues of the neck, in which case total laryngectomy yields better outcomes. (R) • In the absence of clinical or radiological evidence of nodal disease, elective treatment (RT or surgery ± post-operative RT) is recommended to bilateral lymph node levels II, III, IV, V and VI. (R).

Project description:BackgroundFollowing studies reporting sub-optimal gout management, European (EULAR) and British (BSR) guidelines were updated to encourage the prescription of urate-lowering therapy (ULT) with a treat-to-target approach. We investigated whether ULT initiation and urate target attainment has improved following publication of these guidelines, and assessed predictors of these outcomes.MethodsWe used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink to assess attainment of the following outcomes in people (n = 129,972) with index gout diagnoses in the UK from 2004-2020: i) initiation of ULT; ii) serum urate ≤360 µmol/L and ≤300 µmol/L; iii) treat-to-target urate monitoring. Interrupted time-series analyses were used to compare trends in outcomes before and after updated EULAR and BSR management guidelines, published in 2016 and 2017, respectively. Predictors of ULT initiation and urate target attainment were modelled using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards.Findings37,529 (28.9%) of 129,972 people with newly-diagnosed gout had ULT initiated within 12 months. ULT initiation improved modestly over the study period, from 26.8% for those diagnosed in 2004 to 36.6% in 2019 and 34.7% in 2020. Of people diagnosed in 2020 with a serum urate performed within 12 months, 17.1% attained a urate ≤300 µmol/L, while 36.0% attained a urate ≤360 µmol/L. 18.9% received treat-to-target urate monitoring. No significant improvements in ULT initiation or urate target attainment were observed after updated BSR or EULAR management guidance, relative to before. Comorbidities, including chronic kidney disease (CKD), heart failure and obesity, and diuretic use associated with increased odds of ULT initiation but decreased odds of attaining urate targets within 12 months: CKD (adjusted OR 1.61 for ULT initiation, 95% CI 1.55 to 1.67; adjusted OR 0.51 for urate ≤300 µmol/L, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.55; both p < 0.001); heart failure (adjusted OR 1.56 for ULT initiation, 95% CI 1.48 to 1.64; adjusted OR 0.85 for urate ≤300 µmol/L, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.95; both p < 0.001); obesity (adjusted OR 1.32 for ULT initiation, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.36; adjusted OR 0.61 for urate ≤300 µmol/L, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.65; both p < 0.001); and diuretic use (adjusted OR 1.49 for ULT initiation, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.55; adjusted OR 0.61 for urate ≤300 µmol/L, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.66; both p < 0.001).InterpretationInitiation of ULT and attainment of urate targets remain poor for people diagnosed with gout in the UK, despite updated management guidelines. If the evidence-practice gap in gout management is to be bridged, strategies to implement best practice care are needed.FundingNational Institute for Health Research.