Antivenom - Therapeutic Use

Therapeutic Use

The principle of antivenom is based on that of vaccines, developed by Edward Jenner; however, instead of inducing immunity in the patient directly, it is induced in a host animal and the hyperimmunized serum is transfused into the patient.

Antivenoms can be classified into monovalent (when they are effective against a given species' venom) or polyvalent (when they are effective against a range of species, or several different species at the same time). The first antivenom for snakes (called an anti-ophidic serum) was developed by Albert Calmette, a French scientist of the Pasteur Institute working at its Indochine branch in 1895, against the Indian Cobra (Naja naja). Vital Brazil, a Brazilian scientist, developed in 1901 the first monovalent and polyvalent antivenoms for Central and South American Crotalus, Bothrops and Elaps genera, as well as for certain species of venomous spiders, scorpions, and frogs. They were all developed in a Brazilian institution, the Instituto Butantan, located in São Paulo, Brazil.

Antivenoms for therapeutic use are often preserved as freeze-dried ampoules, but some are available only in liquid form and must be kept refrigerated. They are not immediately inactivated by heat, however, so a minor gap in the cold chain is not disastrous. The majority of antivenoms (including all snake antivenoms) are administered intravenously; however, stonefish and redback spider antivenoms are given intramuscularly. The intramuscular route has been questioned in some situations as not uniformly effective.

Antivenoms bind to and neutralize the venom, halting further damage, but do not reverse damage already done. Thus, they should be administered as soon as possible after the venom has been injected, but are of some benefit as long as venom is present in the body. Since the advent of antivenoms, some bites which were previously invariably fatal have become only rarely fatal provided that the antivenom is administered soon enough.

Antivenoms are purified by several processes but will still contain other serum proteins that can act as antigens. Some individuals may react to the antivenom with an immediate hypersensitivity reaction (anaphylaxis) or a delayed hypersensitivity (serum sickness) reaction and antivenom should, therefore, be used with caution. Despite this caution, antivenom is typically the sole effective treatment for a life-threatening condition, and once the precautions for managing these reactions are in place, an anaphylactoid reaction is not grounds to refuse to give antivenom if otherwise indicated. Although it is a popular myth that a person allergic to horses "cannot" be given antivenom, the side effects are manageable, and antivenom should be given as rapidly as the side effects can be managed.

In the U.S. the only approved antivenom for pit viper (rattlesnake, copperhead and water moccasin) snakebite is based on a purified product made in sheep known as CroFab. It was approved by the FDA in October, 2000. U.S. coral snake antivenom is no longer manufactured, and remaining stocks of in-date antivenom for coral snakebite expired in the Fall of 2009, leaving the U.S. without a Coral snake antivenom. Efforts are being made to obtain approval for a coral snake antivenom produced in Mexico which would work against U.S. coral snakebite, but such approval remains speculative. In the absence of antivenom, all coral snakebite should be treated in a hospital by elective endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation until the effects of coral snake neurotoxins abate. It is important to remember that respiratory paralysis in coral snakebite can occur suddenly, often up to 12 or more hours after the bite, so intubation and ventilation should be employed in anticipation of respiratory failure and not after it occurs, when it may be too late.