FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 347:1804-1805 November 28, 2002 Number 22 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited Related Article by Gold, B. S. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The review by Gold et al. on bites of venomous snakes (Aug. 1 issue)¹ does not mention Sutherland's pressure-immobilization technique for the first-aid treatment of neurotoxic envenomation, despite its sound experimental basis and experience of its clinical efficacy, especially in Australia.² In controlled trials, epinephrine was effective³ and promethazine, a histamine H₁-receptor blocker, was ineffective⁴ in preventing early anaphylactoid reactions to antivenom.

Recurrence of the effects of venom after an initial response to antivenom was demonstrated in Thailand in 1986,⁵ so this phenomenon should not have been an "unexpected observation" during trials of Crotalidae Polyvalent Immune . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Cheng, A. C., Currie, B. J. (2004). Venomous Snakebites Worldwide with a Focus on the Australia-Pacific Region: Current Management and Controversies. J Intensive Care Med 19: 259-269 [Abstract]