Evaluation of the effectiveness of sugammadex for verapamil intoxication

Testing the Protective Effects of Sulfobutylether-Βeta-Cyclodextrin (SBECD) and Sugammadex against Chlorpromazine-Induced Acute Toxicity in SH-SY5Y Cell Line and in NMRI Mice

Chlorpromazine (CPZ) is an antipsychotic drug which can cause several adverse effects and drug poisoning. Recent studies demonstrated that CPZ forms highly stable complexes with certain cyclodextrins (CDs) such as sulfobutylether-β-CD (SBECD) and sugammadex (SGD). Since there is no available antidote in CPZ intoxication, and considering the good tolerability of these CDs even if when administered parenterally, we aimed to investigate the protective effects of SBECD and SGD against CPZ-induced acute toxicity employing in vitro (SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells) and in vivo (zebrafish embryo) models. Our major findings and conclusions are the following: (1) both SBECD and SGD strongly relieved the cytotoxic effects of CPZ in SH-SY5Y cells. (2) SGD co-treatment did not affect or increase the CPZ-induced 24 h mortality in NMRI mice, while SBECD caused a protective effect in a dose-dependent fashion. (3) The binding constants of ligand–CD complexes and/or the in vitro protective effects of CDs can help to estimate the in vivo suitability of CDs as antidotes; however, some other factors can overwrite these predictions.

Effectiveness of sugammadex for cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury

Cerebral ischemia may cause permanent brain damage and behavioral dysfunction. The efficacy and mechanisms of pharmacological treatments administered immediately after cerebral damage are not fully known. Sugammadex is a licensed medication. As other cyclodextrins have not passed the necessary phase tests, trade preparations are not available, whereas sugammadex is frequently used in clinical anesthetic practice. Previous studies have not clearly described the effects of the cyclodextrin family on cerebral ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) damage. The aim of this study was to determine whether sugammadex had a neuroprotective effect against transient global cerebral ischemia. Animals were assigned to control, sham-operated, S 16 and S 100 groups. Transient global cerebral ischemia was induced by 10-minute occlusion of the bilateral common carotid artery, followed by 24-hour reperfusion. At the end of the experiment, neurological behavior scoring was performed on the rats, followed by evaluation of histomorphological and biochemical measurements. Sugammadex 16 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg improved neurological outcome, which was associated with reductions in both histological and neurological scores. The hippocampus TUNEL (terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling) and caspase results in the S 16 and S 100 treatment groups were significantly lower than those of the I/R group. Neurological scores in the treated groups were significantly higher than those of the I/R group. The study showed that treatment with 16 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg sugammadex had a neuroprotective effect in a transient global cerebral I/R rat model. However, 100 mg/kg sugammadex was more neuroprotective in rats.

Comparison of Effects of Separate and Combined Sugammadex and Lipid Emulsion Administration on Hemodynamic Parameters and Survival in a Rat Model of Verapamil Toxicity

BACKGROUND

Toxicity of calcium channel blockers leads to high patient mortality and there is no effective antidote. The benefit of using 20% lipid emulsion and sugammadex has been reported. The present study measured the effect of sugammadex and 20% lipid emulsion on hemodynamics and survival in a rat model of verapamil toxicity.

MATERIAL/METHODS

In this single-blinded randomized control study, rats were separated into 4 groups of 7 rats each: Sugammadex (S), Sugammadex plus 20% lipid emulsion (SL), 20% lipid emulsion (L), and control (C). Heart rates and mean arterial pressures were monitored and noted each minute until death.

RESULTS

Average time to death was 21.0±9.57 minutes for group C, 35.57±10.61 minutes for group S, 37.14±16.6 minutes for group L and 49.86±27.56 minutes for group SL. Time to death was significantly longer in other groups than in the control group (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Verapamil overdose is has a comparatively high mortality rate and there is no effective antidote. Treatment generally involves gastric decontamination and symptomatic treatment to counteract the drug's negative effects. In animal studies sugammadex and lipid emulsion had a positive effect on survival in patients with calcium channel blocker toxicity. Sugammadex and intralipid increased survival in a rat model of verapamil toxicity. The combination of both drugs may decrease cardiotoxicity. Sugammadex alone or combined with 20% lipid emulsion reduce the need for inotropic agents. The mechanism requires clarification with larger studies.

Effects of 2-Hydroxypropyl-Beta-Cyclodextrin on Cardiovascular Signs of Amitriptyline Poisoning in a Rat Model

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of 2-hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin (HPBCD) as an antidotal treatment for the in vivo cardiovascular effects of amitriptyline poisoning. Experiments were carried out on 33 Wistar rats. To evaluate cardiovascular effects of HPBCD, rats were infused with dextrose or HPBCD. In the poisoning model, amitriptyline (0.94 mg/kg/min) was infused until the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) dropped to 50 % of the baseline. Following amitriptyline infusion, dextrose, low-dose HPBCD (4.19 mg/kg/min), or high-dose HPBCD (16.76 mg/kg/min) was infused, and MAP, heart rate (HR), and electrocardiogram were recorded for 60 min. Hearts were examined for tissue damage and apoptosis. HPBCD infusion alone did not yield significant difference for MAP, HR, QRS duration, QT interval, and cardiac tissue damage when compared to dextrose (p > 0.05). In the poisoning model, MAP and HR decreased, while QRS duration and QT interval prolonged significantly following amitriptyline infusion (p < 0.0167). Dextrose, low-dose HPBCD, and high-dose HPBCD infusion similarly corrected MAP, HR, QRS duration, and QT interval values at the end-experiment time point (p > 0.05). Histological scores for tissue damage and apoptosis showed no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Based on our results, HPBCD did not show cardiovascular toxicity, while it was not more effective than dextrose for the treatment of amitriptyline poisoning. Further antidotal studies of cyclodextrins with higher doses and/or binding affinities are needed for poisonings.

Nano-antidotes for drug overdose and poisoning

The number of intoxications from xenobiotics—natural or synthetic foreign chemicals, or substances given in higher doses than typically present in humans—has risen tremendously in the last decade, placing poisoning as the leading external cause of death in the United States. This epidemic has fostered the development of antidotal nanomedicines, which we call “nano-antidotes,” capable of efficiently neutralizing offending compounds in situ. Although prototype nano-antidotes have shown efficacy in proof-of-concept studies, the gap to clinical translation can only be filled if issues such as the clinical relevance of intoxication models and the safety profile of nano-antidotes are properly addressed. As the unmet medical needs in resuscitative care call for better treatments, this Perspective critically reviews the recent progress in antidotal medicine and emerging nanotechnologies.

Sugammadex: What do we Know and What do we Still Need to Know? A Review of the Recent (2013 to 2014) Literature

Since its launch in 2008, sugammadex has been considered one of the most significant developments in anaesthesia-related pharmacology. With almost 500 sugammadex-related publications and over nine million patient exposures worldwide, user experience and scientific data have grown exponentially. However, several important questions are yet to be answered. This article reviews the sugammadex-related literature in 2013 and 2014 to determine which of these questions have been answered more fully over the last 18 months and which questions require more information and research.

Treatment for calcium channel blocker poisoning: a systematic review

CONTEXT

Calcium channel blocker poisoning is a common and sometimes life-threatening ingestion.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reported effects of treatments for calcium channel blocker poisoning. The primary outcomes of interest were mortality and hemodynamic parameters. The secondary outcomes included length of stay in hospital, length of stay in intensive care unit, duration of vasopressor use, functional outcomes, and serum calcium channel blocker concentrations.

METHODS

Medline/Ovid, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, TOXLINE, International pharmaceutical abstracts, Google Scholar, and the gray literature up to December 31, 2013 were searched without time restriction to identify all types of studies that examined effects of various treatments for calcium channel blocker poisoning for the outcomes of interest. The search strategy included the following Keywords: [calcium channel blockers OR calcium channel antagonist OR calcium channel blocking agent OR (amlodipine or bencyclane or bepridil or cinnarizine or felodipine or fendiline or flunarizine or gallopamil or isradipine or lidoflazine or mibefradil or nicardipine or nifedipine or nimodipine or nisoldipine or nitrendipine or prenylamine or verapamil or diltiazem)] AND [overdose OR medication errors OR poisoning OR intoxication OR toxicity OR adverse effect]. Two reviewers independently selected studies and a group of reviewers abstracted all relevant data using a pilot-tested form. A second group analyzed the risk of bias and overall quality using the STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) checklist and the Thomas tool for observational studies, the Institute of Health Economics tool for Quality of Case Series, the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines, and the modified NRCNA (National Research Council for the National Academies) list for animal studies. Qualitative synthesis was used to summarize the evidence. Of 15,577 citations identified in the initial search, 216 were selected for analysis, including 117 case reports. The kappa on the quality analysis tools was greater than 0.80 for all study types.

RESULTS

The only observational study in humans examined high-dose insulin and extracorporeal life support. The risk of bias across studies was high for all interventions and moderate to high for extracorporeal life support. High-dose insulin. High-dose insulin (bolus of 1 unit/kg followed by an infusion of 0.5-2.0 units/kg/h) was associated with improved hemodynamic parameters and lower mortality, at the risks of hypoglycemia and hypokalemia (low quality of evidence). Extracorporeal life support. Extracorporeal life support was associated with improved survival in patients with severe shock or cardiac arrest at the cost of limb ischemia, thrombosis, and bleeding (low quality of evidence). Calcium, dopamine, and norepinephrine. These agents improved hemodynamic parameters and survival without documented severe side effects (very low quality of evidence). 4-Aminopyridine. Use of 4-aminopyridine was associated with improved hemodynamic parameters and survival in animal studies, at the risk of seizures. Lipid emulsion therapy. Lipid emulsion was associated with improved hemodynamic parameters and survival in animal models of intravenous verapamil poisoning, but not in models of oral verapamil poisoning. Other studies. Studies on decontamination, atropine, glucagon, pacemakers, levosimendan, and plasma exchange reported variable results, and the methodologies used limit their interpretation. No trial was documented in humans poisoned with calcium channel blockers for Bay K8644, CGP 28932, digoxin, cyclodextrin, liposomes, bicarbonate, carnitine, fructose 1,6-diphosphate, PK 11195, or triiodothyronine. Case reports were only found for charcoal hemoperfusion, dialysis, intra-aortic balloon pump, Impella device and methylene blue.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment for calcium channel blocker poisoning is supported by low-quality evidence drawn from a heterogeneous and heavily biased literature. High-dose insulin and extracorporeal life support were the interventions supported by the strongest evidence, although the evidence is of low quality.