4.1 Review

Blood concentrations of new psychoactive substances belonging to benzodiazepine class

期刊

FORENSIC TOXICOLOGY
卷 39, 期 2, 页码 377-384

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11419-021-00581-y

关键词

Benzodiazepines; New psychoactive substances; Blood concentrations; Intoxication; Interpretation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent global increase in new psychoactive substances (NPS) of the benzodiazepine class has raised concerns due to their higher risks compared to pharmaceutical benzodiazepines. Data analysis revealed the difficulty in interpreting concentrations of these substances, as concurrent use with other drugs and factors often contribute to toxic effects or deaths in real cases. Access to source articles quantifying new benzodiazepines is enabled through this report.
Purpose There has been a global increase in the number and availability of new psychoactive substances (NPS) belonging to the benzodiazepine class. New benzodiazepines are much more dangerous to health and life than pharmaceutical benzodiazepines. These substances have been associated with many deaths. Interpreting own results usually requires a comparison to previously published cases; therefore, a referenced compilation of previously published concentration data would be useful. Methods The data collection was based on a search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google search engine. All available data from articles and reports that measured new benzodiazepine concentrations in plasma, serum, or whole blood were included in the data analysis. Results The presented tables list the observed concentrations in fatal and nonfatal cases involving 13 NPS belonging to the benzodiazepine class. Conclusions The interpretation of the concentrations of the NPS belonging to the benzodiazepine class is difficult. Concomitant use of benzodiazepines and other drugs as well as other factors often contribute to toxic effects or deaths in real cases. This report enables quick access to the source articles quantifying new benzodiazepines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据