The Protocol of Choice for Treatment of Snake Bite

الملخص EN

The aim of the current study is to compare three different methods of treatment of snake bite to determine the most efficient one.

To unify the protocol of snake bite treatment in our center, we retrospectively reviewed files of the snake-bitten patients who had been referred to us between 2010 and 2014.

They were contacted for follow-up using phone calls.

Demographic and on-arrival characteristics, protocol used for treatment (WHO/Haddad/GF), and outcome/complications were evaluated.

Patients were entered into one of the protocol groups and compared.

Of a total of 63 patients, 56 (89%) were males.

Five, 19, and 28 patients were managed by Haddad, WHO, or GF protocols, respectively.

Eleven patients had fallen into both GF and WHO protocols and were excluded.

Serum sickness was significantly more common when WHO protocol was used while 100% of the compartment syndromes and 71% of deformities had been reported after GF protocol.

The most important complications were considered to be deformity, compartment syndrome, and amputation and were more frequent after the use of WHO and GF protocols (23.1% versus 76.9%; none in Haddad; P = NS).

Haddad protocol seems to be the best for treatment of snake-bitten patients in our region.

However, this cannot be strictly concluded because of the limited sample size and nonsignificant P values.