Reply to the ‘Comment on “Acetylcysteine in paracetamol poisoning: a perspective of 45 years of use”’ by M. E. Mullins, M. C. Yarema, M. L. A. Sivilotti, M. Thompson, D. A. Algren, M. C. Beuhler and C. P. Holstege, Toxicol. Res., 2019, 8, DOI: 10.1039/C9TX00158A

D. Nicholas Bateman; James W. Dear

doi:10.1039/C9TX00216B

Jump to main content

Jump to site search

SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE

Maintenance work is planned for Wednesday 1st May 2024 from 9:00am to 11:00am (BST).

During this time, the performance of our website may be affected - searches may run slowly and some pages may be temporarily unavailable. If this happens, please try refreshing your web browser or try waiting two to three minutes before trying again.

We apologise for any inconvenience this might cause and thank you for your patience.

You do not have JavaScript enabled. Please enable JavaScript to access the full features of the site or access our non-JavaScript page.

Reply to the ‘Comment on “Acetylcysteine in paracetamol poisoning: a perspective of 45 years of use”’ by M. E. Mullins, M. C. Yarema, M. L. A. Sivilotti, M. Thompson, D. A. Algren, M. C. Beuhler and C. P. Holstege, Toxicol. Res., 2019, 8, DOI: 10.1039/C9TX00158A

D. Nicholas Bateman

* and James W. Dear

Abstract

Mullins et al. made a comment on our article (DOI: 10.1039/C9TX00002J) stating they noticed the omission of the one-bag, standard concentration protocol which is shared by several centers in North America when we discussed IV acetylcysteine protocols. In this reply we clarify that we did not include this methodology as it is a technical adaption of the way in which a 2-bag NAC regimen in administered and there is insufficient comparative data with other regimens.