Study Title and Description
Single tonic-clonic seizure after energy drink abuse.
Key Questions Addressed
|1||For [population], is caffeine intake above [exposure dose], compared to intakes [exposure dose] or less, associated with adverse effects on acute toxicity*?|
Primary Publication Information
|Title||Single tonic-clonic seizure after energy drink abuse.|
|Author||RS Calabrò,D Italiano,G Gervasi,P Bramanti,|
Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.
Extraction Form: Acute Toxicity - Study Design Details
No arms have been defined in this extraction form.
|Question... Follow Up||Answer||Follow-up Answer|
|What outcome is being evaluated in this paper?||Acute|
|What is the objective of the study (as reported by the authors)?||Case report of epileptic seizure in 20 year old man secondary to chronic energy drink intake|
|Provide a general description of the methods as reported by the authors. Information should be extracted based on relevance to the SR (i.e., caffeine related methods)||20 year old man presented with a witnessed tonic clonic seizure, 1 hour after episode, normal except confusion (self report he drank 4-6 cans Red Bull daily = 320-480mg/d) denied risk factors for seizure: sleep deprivation, fevers, infections, illicit drugs|
|How many outcome-specific endpoints are evaluated?||4|
|What is the (or one of the) endpoint(s) evaluated? (Each endpoint listed separately)||blood work = normal|
|List additional health endpoints (separately).|
|List additional health endpoints (separately)|
|What is the study design?||Case report|
|Randomized or Non-Randomized?|
|What were the diagnostics or methods used to measure the outcome?||Both|
|Optional: Name of Method or short description|
|Energy drinks||Energy drinks|
|What was the reference, comparison, or control group(s)? (e.g. high vs low consumption, number of cups, etc.)||none case report|
|What were the listed confounders or modifying factors as stated by the authors? (e.g. multi-variable components of models. Copy from methods)||family history (absence of pre-disposition to seizures and no head trauma ), no drug use confirmed through urinalysis/tox report|
|Provide a general description of results (as reported by the authors).||20 year old man presented with a witnessed tonic clonic seizure, 1 hour after episode, normal except confusion (self report he drank 4-6 cans Red Bull daily = 320-480mg/d)denied risk factors for seizure: sleep deprivation, fevers, infections, illicit drugs. His urinalysis, toxicology screen and blood work confirmed no other drugs in the system. An EEG confirmed the need for treatment (sharp waves in his temporal region bilaterally), after one month of treatment the patient was seen, and treatment was gradually discontinued. At a two year follow up no other seizures were reported.|
|Did the authors perform a dose-response analysis (or trend/related analysis)?||No|
|What were the authors's observations re: trend analysis?|
|What were the author's conclusions?||believe this is the first case report of an epileptic seizure secondary to chronic energy drink use|
|What were the sources of funding?||none reported|
|What conflicts of interest were reported?||none reported|
|Does the exposure (dose) need to be standardized to the SR?||Multiple metrics|
|Provide calculations/conversions for the exposure based on the decision tree in the guide (for all endpoints/exposure levels of interest).||Red bull (4-6 cans)x80mg/can = 320-480 mg/day|
|List all the endpoint(s) followed by the dose (mg) which will be used in comparison to Nawrot. Characterize value as LOAEL/NOAEL, etc. if possible.||320-480mg/day, confusion and epileptic seizure|
|Notes regarding selection/listing of endpoints and exposures/doses to be compared to Nawrot.|
|What is the importance of the study with respect to the adverseness of the outcome?||Important|
No baseline characteristics have been defined for this extraction form.
Results & Comparisons
No Results found.
|Arm or Total||Title||Description||Comments|
No quality dimensions were specified.
No quality rating data was found.