The Significance of Extracorporeal Removal Treatment in Paraquat Poisoning Patients: An Analysis of Plasma Paraquat Concentrations
Author(s)
Harsimran Kaur, PharmD1, Daniel Vaz, M.Pharm2, Girish Thunga, PhD2, Vijayanarayana Kunhikatta, PhD2;
1Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Research Scholar, Udupi, Karnataka, India, 2Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Udupi, Karnataka, India
1Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Research Scholar, Udupi, Karnataka, India, 2Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Udupi, Karnataka, India
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the significance of extracorporeal removal (ECR) treatment with respect to plasma paraquat concentrations in paraquat poisoning patients through spectrophotometry.
METHODS: Adult patients admitted to our tertiary care teaching hospital with paraquat poisoning from September 2022 to September 2024 were included in this study following informed consent. Baseline plasma samples (collected at admission) and follow-up samples (collected within 72 hours of baseline) were obtained from each patient for paraquat concentration analysis via spectrophotometry. Patients were categorised into two treatment groups: ECR and Non-ECR. Primary outcomes were clinical improvement and non-improvement. Chi square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables respectively, using SPSS software.
RESULTS: A total of 43 patients were included in the study, with 27 (62.8%) males and a median (IQR) age of 27 (15) years. Clinical improvement rate was 30.2% (n=13). No significant difference was observed between ECR and Non-ECR treatment groups in terms of clinical improvement (p = 0.7). A total of 80 plasma samples were analysed, with 54 from the ECR group and 26 from the Non-ECR group. The median (IQR) baseline plasma paraquat concentrations in the ECR and Non-ECR groups were 14.33 (10.81) mg/L and 12.94 (20.98) mg/L, respectively (p = 0.7). The median (IQR) follow-up plasma paraquat concentrations in the ECR and Non-ECR groups were 13.82 (23.86) mg/L and 12.38 (19.97) mg/L, respectively (p = 0.3). Of the follow-up samples, 10 (39.3%) in the ECR group and 2 (13.3%) in the Non-ECR group showed reduced plasma paraquat concentrations compared to baseline (p = 0.2).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the ECR and Non-ECR treatment groups in terms of clinical improvement in paraquat poisoning patients. Although a higher proportion of follow-up samples in the ECR group showed reduced paraquat levels compared to baseline, the difference was not statistically significant.
METHODS: Adult patients admitted to our tertiary care teaching hospital with paraquat poisoning from September 2022 to September 2024 were included in this study following informed consent. Baseline plasma samples (collected at admission) and follow-up samples (collected within 72 hours of baseline) were obtained from each patient for paraquat concentration analysis via spectrophotometry. Patients were categorised into two treatment groups: ECR and Non-ECR. Primary outcomes were clinical improvement and non-improvement. Chi square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables respectively, using SPSS software.
RESULTS: A total of 43 patients were included in the study, with 27 (62.8%) males and a median (IQR) age of 27 (15) years. Clinical improvement rate was 30.2% (n=13). No significant difference was observed between ECR and Non-ECR treatment groups in terms of clinical improvement (p = 0.7). A total of 80 plasma samples were analysed, with 54 from the ECR group and 26 from the Non-ECR group. The median (IQR) baseline plasma paraquat concentrations in the ECR and Non-ECR groups were 14.33 (10.81) mg/L and 12.94 (20.98) mg/L, respectively (p = 0.7). The median (IQR) follow-up plasma paraquat concentrations in the ECR and Non-ECR groups were 13.82 (23.86) mg/L and 12.38 (19.97) mg/L, respectively (p = 0.3). Of the follow-up samples, 10 (39.3%) in the ECR group and 2 (13.3%) in the Non-ECR group showed reduced plasma paraquat concentrations compared to baseline (p = 0.2).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the ECR and Non-ECR treatment groups in terms of clinical improvement in paraquat poisoning patients. Although a higher proportion of follow-up samples in the ECR group showed reduced paraquat levels compared to baseline, the difference was not statistically significant.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
CO140
Topic
Clinical Outcomes
Topic Subcategory
Clinical Outcomes Assessment, Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, SDC: Injury & Trauma, SDC: Mental Health (including addition), STA: Multiple/Other Specialized Treatments