Author(s): Eddleston M, Juszczak E, Buckley NA, Senarathna L, Mohamed F,
Abstract Share this page
Abstract BACKGROUND: The case-fatality for intentional self-poisoning in the rural developing world is 10-50-fold higher than that in industrialised countries, mostly because of the use of highly toxic pesticides and plants. We therefore aimed to assess whether routine treatment with multiple-dose activated charcoal, to interrupt enterovascular or enterohepatic circulations, offers benefit compared with no charcoal in such an environment. METHODS: We did an open-label, parallel group, randomised, controlled trial of six 50 g doses of activated charcoal at 4-h intervals versus no charcoal versus one 50 g dose of activated charcoal in three Sri Lankan hospitals. 4632 patients were randomised to receive no charcoal (n=1554), one dose of charcoal (n=1545), or six doses of charcoal (n=1533); outcomes were available for 4629 patients. 2338 (51\%) individuals had ingested pesticides, whereas 1647 (36\%) had ingested yellow oleander (Thevetia peruviana) seeds. Mortality was the primary outcome measure. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN02920054. FINDINGS: Mortality did not differ between the groups. 97 (6.3\%) of 1531 participants in the multiple-dose group died, compared with 105 (6.8\%) of 1554 in the no charcoal group (adjusted odds ratio 0.96, 95\% CI 0.70-1.33). No differences were noted for patients who took particular poisons, were severely ill on admission, or who presented early. INTERPRETATION: We cannot recommend the routine use of multiple-dose activated charcoal in rural Asia Pacific; although further studies of early charcoal administration might be useful, effective affordable treatments are urgently needed.
This article was published in Lancet
and referenced in Journal of Clinical Toxicology