Hexahydrocannabinol poisoning reported to French poison centres.
Magali Labadie, Audrey Nardon, Nadege Castaing, Coralie Bragança, Amélie Daveluy, Jean-Michel Gaulier, Souleiman El Balkhi, Marike Grenouillet
Clinical Toxicology February 2024 DOI: 10.1080/15563650.2024.2318409 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Retrospective observational study Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 37 |
| Population | People who self-reported hexahydrocannabinol exposure and were reported to French poison centres between 1 January 2022 and 31 May 2023 |
| Duration | Cases reported between 1 January 2022 and 31 May 2023 |
| Measures | Poisoning Severity Score |
| Keywords | Hexahydrocannabinol Cannabinoid New psychoactive substances Poison centre Poisoning |
| Key findings | Reported hexahydrocannabinol exposures produced mainly neurological (85 per cent) and cardiovascular (61 per cent) effects, with 59 per cent of patients hospitalized and severity scored moderate in 16 and severe in two; all patients with known outcomes recovered. The authors note that tetrahydrocannabinol use likely contributed to effects in a substantial proportion of cases and that biological testing was done in only six patients. |
Abstract
Hexahydrocannabinol is a hexahydro derivative of cannabinol. Poisoning with hexahydrocannabinol was first observed in Europe in May 2022. This is a retrospective observational study of cases of self-reported hexahydrocannabinol exposure reported to French poison centres between 1 January 2022 and 31 May 2023. There were 37 cases, including 19 in May 2023. The median age of the patients was 36 (interquartile range 28-43) years, and most were men. Eight patients had a history of substance use disorder. The route of exposure was ingestion in 24, inhalation (smoking or vaping) in 10, inhalation and ingestion in two and sublingual in one. Clinical features were neurological (85 per cent), cardiovascular (61 per cent), gastrointestinal (33 per cent), psychiatric (27 per cent) and ocular (21 per cent). Fifty-nine per cent of the patients were hospitalized. In four patients, the Poisoning Severity Score was 0 (asymptomatic); in 15 patients, the Score was 1 (minor); in 16, the Score was 2 (moderate); and in two cases, the Score was 3 (severe). In 70 per cent of patients, the outcome was known, and all recovered. Testing of biological samples was only undertaken in six cases. Five patients had positive blood or urine tests for hexahydrocannabinol; in two patients, tetrahydrocannabinol and metabolites were also detected. In addition, there was an additional patient in whom Δ8- and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol was detected in the substances used. Clinical effects reported in this series included neuropsychiatric and somatic effects. Whilst these cases related to self-reported hexahydrocannabinol use, it is likely that tetrahydrocannabinol use also contributed to the effects in a substantial proportion of cases. This study has some limitations, such as the lack of available information due to the retrospective nature of the study. As a result, it probably overestimates the number of moderate and severe cases due to under-reporting of cases of little or no severity. Analysis of the patient's blood and urine was performed only in six patients, so we cannot be certain that the products consumed by the other patients were hexahydrocannabinol. The clinical effects attributed to hexahydrocannabinol were neurological, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, psychiatric and ocular predominantly and were sometimes serious.