The efficacies of specific Bothrops atrox-Lachesis and standard Bothrops-Lachesis antivenoms were compared in the north eastern Amazon region of Brazil. The main aim was to investigate whether a specific antivenom raised against the venom of B. atrox, the most important Amazon snake species from a medical point of view, was necessary for the treatment of patients in this region. Seventy-four patients with local and systemic effects of envenoming by Bothrops or Lachesis snakes were randomly allocated to receive either specific (n = 38) or standard (n = 36) antivenoms. In 46 cases (24 in the standard antivenom group, 22 in the other) the snake was identified either by enzyme immunoassay or by examination of the dead snake, as B. atrox in 45, L. muta in one. Patients were similar in all clinical and epidemiological respects before treatment. Results indicated that both antivenoms were equally effective in reversing all signs of envenoming detected both clinically and in the laboratory. Venom-induced haemostatic abnormalities were resolved within 24 h after the start of antivenom therapy in most patients. The extent of local complications, such as local skin necrosis and secondary infection, was similar in both groups. There were no deaths. The incidence of early anaphylactic reactions was 18% and 19%, respectively for specific and standard antivenoms; none was life-threatening. Measurement of serum venom concentrations by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) confirmed that both antivenoms cleared venom antigenaemia effectively. EIA also revealed that one patient had been bitten by Lachesis muta, although the clinical features in this case were not distinctive.
BackgroundSecondary bacterial infections from snakebites contribute to the high complication rates that can lead to permanent function loss and disabilities. Although common in endemic areas, routine empirical prophylactic use of antibiotics aiming to prevent secondary infection lacks a clearly defined policy. The aim of this work was to estimate the efficacy of amoxicillin clavulanate for reducing the secondary infection incidence in patients bitten by Bothrops snakes, and, secondarily, identify risk factors for secondary infections from snakebites in the Western Brazilian Amazon.Methods and findingsThis was an open-label, two-arm individually randomized superiority trial to prevent secondary infection from Bothrops snakebites. The antibiotic chosen for this clinical trial was oral amoxicillin clavulanate per seven days compared to no intervention. A total of 345 patients were assessed for eligibility in the study period. From this total, 187 accomplished the inclusion criteria and were randomized, 93 in the interventional group and 94 in the untreated control group. All randomized participants completed the 7 days follow-up period. Enzyme immunoassay confirmed Bothrops envenoming diagnosis in all participants. Primary outcome was defined as secondary infection (abscess and/or cellulitis) until day 7 after admission. Secondary infection incidence until 7 days after admission was 35.5% in the intervention group and 44.1% in the control group [RR = 0.80 (95%CI = 0.56 to 1.15; p = 0.235)]. Survival analysis demonstrated that the time from patient admission to the onset of secondary infection was not different between amoxicillin clavulanate treated and control group (Log-rank = 2.23; p = 0.789).Secondary infections incidence in 7 days of follow-up was independently associated to fibrinogen >400 mg/dL [AOR = 4.78 (95%CI = 2.17 to 10.55; p<0.001)], alanine transaminase >44 IU/L [AOR = 2.52 (95%CI = 1.06 to 5.98; p = 0.037)], C-reactive protein >6.5 mg/L [AOR = 2.98 (95%CI = 1.40 to 6.35; p = 0.005)], moderate pain [AOR = 24.30 (95%CI = 4.69 to 125.84; p<0.001)] and moderate snakebites [AOR = 2.43 (95%CI = 1.07 to 5.50; p = 0.034)].Conclusions/SignificancePreemptive amoxicillin clavulanate was not effective for preventing secondary infections from Bothrops snakebites. Laboratorial markers, such as high fibrinogen, alanine transaminase and C-reactive protein levels, and severity clinical grading of snakebites, may help to accurately diagnose secondary infections.Trial registrationBrazilian Clinical Trials Registry (ReBec): RBR-3h33wy; UTN Number: U1111-1169-1005.
Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) is the main systemic complication and cause of death in viperid envenomation. Although there are hypotheses for the development of AKI, the mechanisms involved are still not established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical-laboratorial-epidemiological factors associated with AKI in victims of Bothrops sp envenomation. This is an observational study carried out at the Fundação de Medicina Tropical Dr. Heitor Vieira Dourado. AKI was defined according to the guidelines of the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN). Among the 186 patients evaluated, AKI was observed in 24 (12.9%) after 48 hours of admission. Stage I was present in 17 (70.8%) patients, II in 3 (12.5%) and III in 4 (16.7%). Epidemiological characterization showed predominance of men, occurrence in rural areas, aged between 16–60 years, feet as the most affected anatomical region, and time to medical assistance less than 3 hours. Hypertension and diabetes were the comorbidities identified. Most of the accidents were classified as moderate, and clinical manifestations included severe pain, mild edema, local bleeding and headache. Laboratory results showed blood uncoagulability, hypofibrinogenemia, leukocytosis, increase of creatine kinase, and high lactate dehydrogenase levels. Multivariate analysis showed an association with high LDH levels [AOR = 1.01 (95% CI = 1.01–1.01, p<0.002)], local bleeding [AOR = 0.13 (95%CI = 0.027–0.59, p<0.009)], and the presence of comorbidities [AOR = 60.96 (95%CI = 9.69–383.30; p<0.000)]. Herein, laboratory markers such as high LDH levels along with local bleeding and comorbidities may aid in the diagnosis of AKI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.