Comparative Assessment of the Effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch and Normal Saline on Severe Hypotension in Patients with Aluminum Phosphide Poisoning: A Retrospective Study.

IF 3.4 Q2 TOXICOLOGY
Journal of Toxicology Pub Date : 2022-03-09 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2022/4985120
Amin Nakhostin-Ansari, Gholamabbas Kafi, Mohammad Arefi, Nasrin Barzegari Dahaj, Samaneh Akbarpour, Asieh Mansouri, Behnam Behnoush, Davood Soroosh
{"title":"Comparative Assessment of the Effects of Hydroxyethyl Starch and Normal Saline on Severe Hypotension in Patients with Aluminum Phosphide Poisoning: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Amin Nakhostin-Ansari,&nbsp;Gholamabbas Kafi,&nbsp;Mohammad Arefi,&nbsp;Nasrin Barzegari Dahaj,&nbsp;Samaneh Akbarpour,&nbsp;Asieh Mansouri,&nbsp;Behnam Behnoush,&nbsp;Davood Soroosh","doi":"10.1155/2022/4985120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Aluminum phosphide poisoning is one of the most common forms of poisoning which requires immediate and urgent treatment.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficiency of two solutions, including hydroxyethyl starch and normal saline, in treating hypotension in patients with aluminum phosphide poisoning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 35 patients with aluminum phosphide poisoning. We reviewed the profile of 18 patients treated with hydroxyethyl starch and 17 patients treated with normal saline. Within-group and between-group differences in systolic blood pressure before and after treatment were compared using paired <i>t</i>-test and independent <i>t</i>-test, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of the subjects in the starch and normal saline groups was 27.06 ± 9.72 and 27.88 ± 9.08, respectively. The levels of blood pressure in the two groups were not significantly different before the treatment; the mean ± SD of systolic blood pressure in the starch and normal saline groups was 72.67 ± 14.49 and 68.59 ± 8.3, respectively (<i>P</i>=0.313). After the treatment, it was significantly increased to 94 ± 24.45 and 85.18 ± 19.9 in the starch group (<i>P</i>=0.001) and the normal saline group (<i>P</i>=0.004), respectively. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups (<i>P</i>=0.245). Only one person survived in each group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>According to the results of this study, although there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of their effects on hypotension, these treatments could not prevent mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":17421,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8926529/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4985120","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Aluminum phosphide poisoning is one of the most common forms of poisoning which requires immediate and urgent treatment.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the efficiency of two solutions, including hydroxyethyl starch and normal saline, in treating hypotension in patients with aluminum phosphide poisoning.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 35 patients with aluminum phosphide poisoning. We reviewed the profile of 18 patients treated with hydroxyethyl starch and 17 patients treated with normal saline. Within-group and between-group differences in systolic blood pressure before and after treatment were compared using paired t-test and independent t-test, respectively.

Results: The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of the subjects in the starch and normal saline groups was 27.06 ± 9.72 and 27.88 ± 9.08, respectively. The levels of blood pressure in the two groups were not significantly different before the treatment; the mean ± SD of systolic blood pressure in the starch and normal saline groups was 72.67 ± 14.49 and 68.59 ± 8.3, respectively (P=0.313). After the treatment, it was significantly increased to 94 ± 24.45 and 85.18 ± 19.9 in the starch group (P=0.001) and the normal saline group (P=0.004), respectively. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P=0.245). Only one person survived in each group.

Conclusion: According to the results of this study, although there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of their effects on hypotension, these treatments could not prevent mortality.

羟乙基淀粉与生理盐水治疗磷化铝中毒患者重度低血压的回顾性比较研究。
背景:磷化铝中毒是最常见的中毒形式之一,需要立即和紧急治疗。目的:比较羟乙基淀粉和生理盐水两种溶液治疗磷化铝中毒患者低血压的疗效。方法:对35例磷化铝中毒患者进行回顾性队列研究。我们回顾了18例羟乙基淀粉治疗的患者和17例生理盐水治疗的患者。治疗前后收缩压组内、组间差异分别采用配对t检验和独立t检验。结果:淀粉组和生理盐水组的平均±标准差(SD)年龄分别为27.06±9.72岁和27.88±9.08岁。治疗前两组血压水平无显著差异;淀粉组和生理盐水组收缩压平均值±SD分别为72.67±14.49和68.59±8.3 (P=0.313)。治疗后,淀粉组为94±24.45分,生理盐水组为85.18±19.9分(P=0.001),生理盐水组为85.18±19.9分(P=0.004)。但两组间差异无统计学意义(P=0.245)。每组只有一人幸存。结论:根据本研究结果,虽然两组在降压效果上无明显差异,但不能预防死亡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Toxicology
Journal of Toxicology TOXICOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
3.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Toxicology is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of toxicological sciences. The journal will consider articles looking at the structure, function, and mechanism of agents that are toxic to humans and/or animals, as well as toxicological medicine, risk assessment, safety evaluation, and environmental health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信