Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 47221

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2021 | Month : July | Volume : 15 | Issue : 7 | Page : OC19 - OC23 Full Version

Correlation of Serum Amylase, Lipase and Creatine Kinase with Severity of Organophosphate Poisoning- A Cohort Study


Published: July 1, 2021 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2021/49962.15117
Noas Tobias Minz, Sarat Chansra Singh, Priyabrata Jena, Pranay Kumar Patro

1. Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack, Odisha, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack, Odisha, India. 3. Postgraduate Student, Department of Medicine, S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack, Odisha, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine, S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack, Odisha, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Pranay Kumar Patro,
Flat No. 3c, Nilamani Enclave, Professor Pada, Cuttack, Odisha, India.
E-mail: kintumd@yahoo.co.in

Abstract

Introduction: Organophosphate Compounds (OP) are widely used pesticides in agriculture. It is easily available and OP poisoning is most common cause of poisoning and hospital admissions. Severe poisoning is associated with high mortality. Severity of poisoning can be assessed by Peradeniya Organophosphorus Poisoning (POP) scale, Acute Physiology and chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) or serum Cholinesterase Level (ChE). Serum amylase, lipase, and creatine kinase are important biomarkers raised in OP poisoning.

Aim: To correlate serum amylase, lipase, and creatine kinase with severity of OP poisoning.

Materials and Methods: This was a hospital based observational cohort study conducted on 130 patients of organophosphate poisoning admitted in General Medicine wards of SCB Medical College, Cuttack, Odisha from June 2019 to December 2020. Serum Acetylcholine Esterase (AChE), amylase, lipase and creatinine kinase were estimated at admission, day 2, and at discharge. Other routine investigations were done. Acetylcholine Esterase (AChE) was used to confirm the diagnosis. The severity of poisoning was assessed using POP scale and graded as mild, moderate and severe. The severity of poisoning and the level of enzymes were correlated. The parameters were tabulated and mean values and Standard Deviation (SD) were analysed using Statistical Package For The Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 22.0.

Results: Out of 130 patients 91 were males and 39 were females, mostly from rural areas, both farming and non-farming community. Age ranged from 14 years to 79 years, with majority in 19 to 39 years. AChE decreased in all cases depending on severity confirming OP poisoning. Severity as assessed by POP score were mild (52 patients), moderate (46 patients) and severe (32 patients). At admission, the Amylase (U/L), Lipase (U/L), and Creatine kinase (U/L) level (mean±SD) in mild poisoning were 83.7±41.9 U, 70.9±18.6, 72.5±34.9, in moderate poisoning 153.6±109.7, 91.9±47.4, 92.6±81.5, and in severe poisoning 243.9±113.8, 195.3±147.7, 298.8±207.4, respectively. Measurements on second day also remained elevated. Among the severe cases 24 patients developed Intermediate Syndrome (IMS), and 26 patients died. There was positive correlation between increase of enzyme levels and the severity of OP poisoning as per POP score.

Conclusion: Serum amylase, lipase, and creatine kinase level correlated well with the severity of organophosphorus poisoning and scan be used additionally as an indicator to assess the severity. Serum amylase is a better indicator of severity than lipase and Creatine Kinase (CPK).

Keywords

Insecticide, Intermediate syndrome, Serum cholinesterase, Severity scale

The Organophosphate Compounds (OPs) are widely used pesticides in agriculture since the World War II. Insecticides are the most common cause of poisoning and hospital admissions in developing countries especially South East Asia with around 2,00,000 deaths each year (1). It has been estimated that approximately one-third of world’s suicide is by consuming pesticides accounting for an estimated death of 2,60,000 deaths per year (2). The official data of National Crime Records Bureau, India 2014 estimated 10.9% of Indian suicides resulted from insecticides (3). In another survey in India, suicide by poisoning accounted for 25.8% during 2019 (4). Patel V et al., survey estimated that in 2010, 38.8% of total suicidal deaths in India are due to pesticides (5). Organophosphates are the third most common cause of pesticide poisoning in India (6). Psychosocial factor is a major underlying cause of suicidal poisoning (7). In the developing countries mortality is as high as 70%, probably due to lack of facilities like transport and medical services, delayed treatment, misdiagnosis or increased patient-doctor ratio or lack of antidotes (8).

Organophosphates combine irreversibly with AChE which results in rapid accumulation of acetylcholine at the cholinergic sites in the nervous system with excessive cholinergic stimulation causing toxicity (9). The severity depends on potency and dose of poison, and time lag between exposure and management (10). Death results from respiratory failure due to respiratory center depression, respiratory muscle paralysis, bronchospasm, and bronchial secretions in cholinergic crisis (Type I paralysis), and from IMS; Type II paralysis, a complication of OP poisoning (11). Diagnosis of OP poisoning is done clinically by history and the toxidrome, and confirmed by decreased serum ChE level. Severity of poisoning can be assessed by using serum ChE, POP scale, APACHE II score, and GCS score. Serum AChE is useful for confirmation of OP poisoning (9). Proudfoot classification is used for severity assessment based on serum ChE level (12). But serum ChE does not always correlate properly with severity and the scale is not reliable (13).

The POP scale devised by Senanayake N et al., is a 3-point scale (0-2) taking six clinical parameters to asses severity of OP poisoning. The severity graded as mild (score 0-3), moderate (score 4-7), severe (score 8-11) when the patient first presents to the emergency ward (14). It is an easy bed side procedure taking only the clinical parameters, but need to be done before starting treatment.

Many studies using other factors are available but there is no consensus regarding those factors to determine severity and to predict morbidity and mortality. Lee WC et al., reported that amylase is frequently increased in severe OP poisoning but lipase assay is indicated for early diagnosis of pancreatitis (15). Matsumiya N et al., reported that elevated amylase is related to respiratory failure in OP poisoning (16). Sumathi ME et al., reported that serum amylase, lipase and Creatine Phospokinase (CPK) could be used as additional prognostic indicator with amylase being the better predictor in OP poisoning (17). High serum CPK level reflects the severity of acute muscle necrosis and is a sensitive indicator of muscle injury (18). CPK was found elevated in acute phase and significantly increased in IMS (19),(20). Mural R et al., reported that CPK can be used for diagnosis and assessment of severity in OP poisoning (21), but in their study only 34 out of 100 patients had raised CPK level, so cannot be a reliable indicator of severity if taken alone. Most of the studies are based on correlation of serum ChE with amylase and as there is lack of local data regarding the severity assessment by using POP scale and enzyme levels. This study was taken up to determine the serum level of amylase, lipase, and CPK and correlating them with the severity of OP poisoning assessed by POP scale.

Material and Methods

The hospital based observational cohort study was conducted on 130 OP poisoning cases admitted to Medicine Ward of SCB Medical College, Cuttack from June 2019 to December 2020. Prior ethical approval from the institution ethics committee and written informed consent from each patient were taken. The study was duly approved by Institutional Ethical Committee vide letter No. 330 dtd. 26.08.2020. Patients satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in the study.

Inclusion criteria: Directly admitted OP poisoning cases were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Referred OP poisoning cases, mixed poisoning and any co-morbid conditions like chronic alcoholism, respiratory, hepatic and renal diseases, old pancreatitis, salivary gland disorders were excluded from the study.

Study Procedure

Each patient was subjected to detailed history, thorough clinical examination and investigations. Standard treatment was given as per the protocol. Serum ChE, amylase, lipase and creatine phosphokinase were estimated at admission and repeated on the second day and at discharge. OP poisoning was confirmed by Serum ChE level. Severity was assessed by Serum ChE level and POP scale. Patients were monitored during the treatment, and were followed-up by telephonic conversation weekly and OPD visit at the end of one month after discharge.

Statistical Analysis

The parameters were tabulated and mean values and Standard Deviation (SD) were analysed using Statistical Package For The Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 22.0. One-way ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) and Paired t-test were used for comparison of Mean and SD between the groups. Biochemical parameters were co-related with POP score using Pearson’s coefficient. Chi-square test was the test of significance. For assessment of diagnostic accuracy of biochemical parameters, Area Under Curve (AUC) in Receptor Operating Curve (ROC) were calculated.

Results

A total of 130 confirmed direct cases of OP poisoning were enrolled in the study. There were 91 males and 39 females. The age ranged from 14 to 79 years with median age 32 years (Table/Fig 1). A total of 89 cases were from rural areas, mostly from farming background. A total of 119 cases were suicidal poisoning, 11 cases were stated accidental poisoning. The common compounds were Chlorpyriphos, Dimethoate and Monocroptophos. Common clinical features were vomiting, diarrhea, sweating, lacrimation, salivation, altered sensorium, pin-point pupils, bradycardia, and tachypnoea. Severity of poisoning as assessed by POP score and serum ChE level in mild, moderate and severe cases at admission was shown in (Table/Fig 2). Patients were categorised as mild (52 cases, 33 males and 19 females), moderate (46 cases, 37 males and 9 females) and severe (32 cases, 20 males and 12 females). (Table/Fig 3) depicts mean level and SD of serum ChE, amylase, lipase and CPK on day 1, day 2 and day of discharge. Amylase was raised in 83 cases (26 mild, 29 moderate, 28 severe cases). Lipase was raised in 67 cases (19 mild, 31 moderate, 17 severe cases). CPK was raised in 48 cases (13 mild, 12 moderate, 23 severe cases). All the patients were given standard treatment as per the protocol. Out of the 32 severe cases, 24 cases developed IMS, 27 patients were put on ventilator, and 26 patients (17 males and 9 females) died, seven patients on first day, six patients on second day and subsequently 13 patients during treatment. (Table/Fig 4) shows enzyme values in IMS and death cases. Almost all cases who developed complications or died having high level of all the three biochemical parameters. After successful treatment 104 patients were discharged. All patients were normal on follow-up.

(Table/Fig 5), (Table/Fig 6), (Table/Fig 7), (Table/Fig 8), (Table/Fig 9), (Table/Fig 10) depict the correlation and diagnostic accuracy values of the enzymes under study. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) of - 0.874 between POP score and ACHE which signifies strong negative correlation and (r) of 0.618, 0.551 and 0.644 between POP score and amylase, lipase and CPK respectively signifies strong positive relationship between these parameters. The AUC in ROC for AChE is 0.987, amylase is 0.633, lipase is 0.595 and CPK is 0.579 (Table/Fig 6), (Table/Fig 11) which suggests that AChE, amylase, lipase and CPK were all good indicators of assessing severity of OP poisoning but AChE and Amylase were better predictors of severity than Lipase and CPK. The sensitivity and specificity values suggests AChE and amylase were more accurate in predicting severity of OP poisoning than Lipase and CPK.

Discussion

An observational study was done by taking 130 organophosphorus poisoning cases applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, and confirming the poisoning by decreased serum ChE. Severity was assessed by POP score and serum amylase, lipase and CPK were measured in each case.

In the study, the male female ratio was 2.3:1 which was same as that observed by Dungdung A et al., (22); whereas it was 2.77:1 and 1.85:1 as observed by Sumathi ME et al., and Paul G et al., respectively (17),(23). Similar ratios were also observed in other studies (24). In this study, 43% patients belong to age group 14-29 years and 43.1% to age group 30-49 years with median age of 32 years. These findings were similar as observed by Paul G et al., (23). In a study, by Salame RN and Wani AS, 46% age group belonged to age group of 21-30 years (24). Mean age was 30.6 years in the study by Dungdung A et al., (22). The adolescent age groups are particularly vulnerable for suicidal attempts, particularly students who usually consume poisons following academic failures or failed relationships as well as conflict with parents. The middle aged peoples usually consume poisons because of poverty and financial liabilities.

In the present study, severity as assessed by POP scoring at admission was mild in 40%, moderate in 35.4% and severe in 24.6% and the severity correlated well with the serum ACHE levels. The number of severe cases were more in this study in comparison to the studies by Dungdung A et al., and Paul G et al., (22),(23).

Many biochemical alterations correlate with the severity of OP poisoning. Serum amylase was one of them may be due to excessive stimulation of pancreas by cholinergic stimulation leading to acute pancreatitis. In this study, Serum amylase levels on the first day of admission was raised in 63.8% patients which was in accordance with Sumathi ME et al., but it was more than that as observed by Paul G et al., may be due to more number of patients in the moderate and severe group (17),(23). Salame RN and Wani AS observed raised amylase levels in 78% patients (24). The presence of complications as well as mortality and the need of ventilatory support are more in patients with hyperamylasemia which was in accordance with studies by Sumathi ME et al., and Lin CL et al., (17),(25). Serum lipase is raised in 51.5% of cases which was in accordance with Dungdung A et al., (56%) but among severe cases only 53% cases have raised lipase levels. So, lipase level does not corroborate well with severity unlike amylase which was raised in 87.5% cases of severe patients (22).

Another biochemical parameter CPK had a promising role as a prognostic indicator in OP poisoning. Serum CPK usually get elevated in OP poisoning due to rhabdomyolysis or IMS which is a common and critical complication of OP poisoning. In the present study serum CPK was raised in 36.92% of patients. It was raised in almost all cases who developed IMS or succumbed. Sumathi ME et al., observed raised CPK level in 77% cases which may be due more percentage of severe cases (17). Hassan NAM and Madboly AG have also similar observations in their prospective study (19). Mural R et al., have observed serum CPK level showed a sensitivity of 70%, specificity of 82% and a positive predictive value of 95% (21).

In the present study, there was strong positive correlation with POP score and serum levels of amylase, lipase, and CPK as well as strong negative correlation with AChE levels. These biochemical parameters showed a declining trend as the patient followed-up and at discharge (Table/Fig 3). The enzyme levels were highest in patients those who developed IMS or required ventilatory support or died (Table/Fig 4) which was in accordance with other observers (16),(22),(25). Diagnostic accuracy of the biochemical parameters showed that serum amylase had highest diagnostic accuracy apart from AChE in comparison to lipase and CPK.

Limitation(s)

The sample size was small, compound wise assessment of severity was not done and pancreatitis was not assessed in some of the severe patients. Further studies with larger sample size and multicenter studies will provide a more definite conclusion.

Conclusion

Serum Amylase, Lipase, and CPK rise with severity of organophosphorus poisoning and can be used as additional prognostic indicators. Serum amylase is most accurate in predicting severity of organophosphorous poisoning along with AChE in comparison to serum lipase and CPK.

References

1.
Afsheri R, Majdzadeh R, Balai-Mood M. Pattern of acute poisoning in Mashhad Iran 1993-2000. J Toxicol Clin Toxico. 2004;42:965-75.[Pubmed]. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Gunnel D, Eddlestin M, Phillips MR, Konradsen F, Kuo Y, Sa C, et al. The global distribution of fatal pesticide self-poisoning: Systematic Review. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:P 357. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
National Crime records Bureau, 2014. Accidental deaths and suicides in India, New Delhi. [Google Scholar].
4.
Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India 2019, National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs 2019; 2: pg- 205.
5.
Patel V, Ramasundara Hettige C, Vijay Kumar L, Thakur JS, Gajalakshmi V, Gururaj G, et al. Suicide mortality in India: A nationally representative survey. Lancet. 2012;379:PP2343-51. [crossref]
6.
Abhilash PC, Singh N. Pesticide use and application: An Indian Scenario. J Hazard Mater. 2009;165(1-3):01-12. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Churi S, Harsha CS, Ramesh M. Pattern of poison information queries received by a newly established South Indian poison information center. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2012;5:79-82.
8.
Ahmed SM, Das B, Nadeem A, Samal RK. Survival pattern in patients with acute organophosphate poisoning on mechanical ventilation: A retrospective intensive care unit-based study in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2014;58:11. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Jeyratnam J, Acute pesticide poisoning: A major global health problem. World Health Stat Q. 1990;43:139-44. [Pubmed].
10.
Yurmez Y, Durukan Y, Yavuz Y, Ikizceli I, Avsarogullari L, Ozkan S, et al. Acute organophosphate poisoning in hospital emergency Room patients. Intern Med. 2007;46 (13):965-69 [Medline]. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Ballantyne B, Marrs TC, et al. Overview of biological and clinical aspects of Organophosphates and Carbamates. Clinical and Experimental Toxicology of Organophosphates and Carbamates. Oxford 1992: pp.3-14. [Google]. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Proudfoot A. Organophosphate and Carbamates insecticides in diagnosis and management of acute poisoning. 1st Edition Oxford Blackwell Scientific.1982:153-57.
13.
Nouira S, Abroug F, Elatrous S, Boujdaria R, Bouchoucha S. Prognostic value of serum cholinesterase in organophosphate poisoning. Chest. 1994;106:1811-14. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Senanayake N, de Silva HJ, Karalliedde L. A scale to assess severity in organophosphorus intoxication: POP scale. Hum Exp Toxicol. 1993;12(4):297-99. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Lee WC, Yang CC, Deng JF, Wu ML, Ger J, Lin HC, et al. The clinical significance of hyperamylasemia in organophophate poisoning. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1998;36(7):673-81. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Matsumiya N, Tanaka M, Iwai MN, Ondo T, Takahashi, Sato S. Elevated amylase is related to development of respiratory failure in organophosphate poisoning. Human Experimental Toxicology. 1996;15:250-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Sumathi ME, Harish Kumar S, Sashidhar KN, Takkalaki N. Prognostic significance of various parameters in acute organophosphorus poisoning. Toxicol Int. 2014;21(2):167-71. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
John M, Oomen A, Zachariah A. Muscle injury in organophosphorus poisoning and its role in development of intermediate syndrome. Neurotoxicology. 2003;24:43-53. [crossref]
19.
Hassan NA, Madboly AG. Correlation between serum creatine phosphokinase and severity of acute organophosphorus poisoning: A prospective clinical study (2012-2013). J Environ Sci Tox Food Technol. 2013;4:18-29. [Google Scholar]. [crossref]
20.
Chetan Kumar G, Bhuvana K, Venkatarathnamma PN, Sarala N. Serum creatine phosphokinase as predictor of intermediate syndrome in organophosphorus poisoning. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2015;19(7):384-87. [crossref] [PubMed]
21.
Mural R, Bajaj G, Mammen D. Study of level of Total Creatine phosphokinase as prognostic indicator in acute organophosphorus poisoning: A prospective study. International Journal of Contemporary Medical Research. 2017;4(2):77-83.
22.
Dungdung A, Kumar A, Kumar B, Preetam M, Tara RK, Md saba. Correlation and prognostic significance of serum amylase, lipase and plasma cholinesterase in acute organophosphorus poisoning. J Family Med Prim Care. 2020;9(4):1873-77. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
Paul G, Kabir MR, Kamrul Hassan ABM, Kabir Ahammed SK, Enayet Hossain M, Ferdaus A, et al. Correlation of serum amylase level with severity of acute organophosphorous compounds poisoning. International Journal of Advances in Medicine. 2021;8(3):352-56. [crossref]
24.
Salame RN, Wani AS. Study of serum amylase levels in organophosphate poisoning. International Journal of Biomedical and Advance Research 2017;8(12):450-54.
25.
Lin CL, Yang CT, Pan KY, Huang CC. Most common intoxication in Nephrology ward organophosphate poisoning. Renal Fail. 2002;26:349-54. [Pubmed]. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

10.7860/JCDR/2021/49962.15117

Date of Submission: Apr 18, 2021
Date of Peer Review: May 04, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Jun 24, 2021
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2021

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Apr 19, 2021
• Manual Googling: May 08, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Jun 23, 2021 (8%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com