Back to Search Start Over

A randomized trial comparing physostigmine vs lorazepam for treatment of antimuscarinic (anticholinergic) toxidrome

Authors :
George Sam Wang
Kennon Heard
Keith A. Baker
Gregory C. Janis
Jan Leonard
Rakesh D. Mistry
Patrick Ng
Source :
Clinical Toxicology. 59:698-704
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
Informa UK Limited, 2020.

Abstract

Toxicity from antimuscarinic agents precipitates a constellation of signs and symptoms; two of the most significant are agitation and delirium. Benzodiazepines are commonly used for treatment; physostigmine is also effective but is underutilized due to concerns for safety and short duration of action. The objective of this study was to compare lorazepam to physostigmine for the treatment of antimuscarinic delirium and agitation.This was a blinded, randomized clinical trial in patients presenting for antimuscarinic toxidrome. Inclusion criteria were: ≥10-18 years old, at least one central and two peripheral antimuscarinic symptoms, delirium and moderate agitation. Subjects were randomized to either (1) lorazepam bolus (0.05 mg/kg) followed by a 4-h normal saline infusion, or (2) physostigmine 0.02 mg/kg bolus followed by a 4-h physostigmine infusion (0.02 mg/kg/h). Primary outcomes were the control of delirium and agitation after bolus and during the infusion.Ten (53%) subjects were enrolled in the lorazepam arm, 9 (47%) in the physostigmine arm. Diphenhydramine was the most common agent ingested (16, 84%). Fewer patients receiving physostigmine had delirium after the initial bolus (44% vs 100%,Physostigmine was superior to lorazepam in controlling antimuscarinic delirium and agitation after bolus dosing, and control of delirium after a 4-h infusion. There were no serious adverse events in either treatment arm. Physostigmine bolus and infusion should be considered in adolescent patients with significant delirium and agitation from antimuscarinic agents.

Details

ISSN :
15569519 and 15563650
Volume :
59
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Clinical Toxicology
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....05685ac0032c99217e6f0955d3032c24
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1080/15563650.2020.1854281