METHODS: Observational case series of patients with potentially life-threatening envenoming who consented to the administration of expired antivenom between August 2020 and May 2022.
RESULTS: A total of 31 patients received the expired antivenom. Malayan pit vipers (Calloselasma rhodostoma) were responsible for 26 (84%) cases and green pit vipers (Trimeresurus species) for two cases (6%). In three patients (10%) the responsible snake could not be identified. Of these, two presented with signs of neurotoxicity and one with coagulopathy. A total of 124 vials of expired antivenom were administered. Fifty-nine vials had expired 2-18 months earlier, 56 vials 19-36 months and nine vials 37-60 months before. Adverse effects of variable severity were observed in seven (23%) patients. All 31 patients fully recovered from systemic envenoming.
CONCLUSIONS: Under closely controlled conditions and monitoring the use of expired snake antivenom proved to be effective and safe. Discarding this precious medication is an unnecessary waste, and it could be a valuable resource in ameliorating the current shortage of antivenom. Emergency use authorization granted by health authorities and preclinical testing of expired antivenoms could provide the support and legal basis for such an approach.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Snakebite patients were prospectively recruited between 2017 and 2019. All patients were examined with POCUS to locate edema and directly visualize and measure the arterial flow in the compressed artery. The presence of DRAF in the compressed artery is suggestive of ACS development because when compartment space restriction occurs, increased retrograde arterial flow is observed in the artery.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven snakebite patients were analyzed. Seventeen patients (63%) were bitten by Crotalinae snakes, seven (26%) by Colubridae, one (4%) by Elapidae, and two (7%) had unidentified snakebites. All Crotalinae bit patients received antivenom, had subcutaneous edema and lacked DRAF in a POCUS examination series.
DISCUSSION: POCUS facilitates clinical decisions for snakebite envenomation. We also highlighted that the anatomic site of the snakebite is an important factor affecting the prognosis of the wounds. There were limitations of this study, including a small number of patients and no comparison with the generally accepted invasive evaluation for ACS.
CONCLUSIONS: We are unable to state that POCUS is a valid surrogate measurement of ACS from this study but see this as a starting point to develop further research in this area. Further study will be needed to better define the utility of POCUS in patients envenomated by snakes throughout the world.