Introduction

The Problem

The World Health Organization estimates that up to five million people are bitten every year by snakes. Out of these 5 million people, about 2.4 million are estimated to be envenomed, resulting in 94,000-125,000 deaths annually. Additionally, it is estimated that about 400,000 of the envenomed patients suffer from either amputation of limbs, or display other severe health consequences, such as renal failure, necrosis, spontaneous bleeding, panhypopituitarism, diabetes, chronic neurological deficits, deformity and amputation of limbs.

The majority of snake bites occurs in South- and South-East Asia, Africa and South America. They are more common in rural areas, inhabited by people that depend on farming and other field working occupations for subsistence. Moreover, the socioeconomic impact on families and communities is adding to the burden of these injuries.

The current solution Antivenom remains the most effective antidote for snake envenoming, but is expensive and in short supply. Furthermore, the decision about which is the proper antidote to apply is not straight forward, as the snake responsible for the envenoming is long gone and identification of such snake species is not the specialty of the medical personnel at the clinics.
In addition to that, administration of antivenom comes with a high risk of side effects. Acute reactions to the treatment cause problems of equal clinical importance as the envenomings themselves. Up to 40% of the victims exhibit severe systemic anaphylaxis, including hypotension and cyanosis. Short term sickness of pyrogenic endotoxin nature and serum sickness in the long term are common adverse reactions [1].

Methods of Detection Numerous venom detection methods have been developed, or modified from already existing molecular biology techniques, such as ELISA and immunoassays, to suit the needs of the problem throughout the years. However, these techniques share disadvantages that prevent them from being used in field clinics for detection of the specific venom in the victim. These are the cost of these assays, the use of expensive and elaborate equipment, the need for trained personnel, and most importantly, the assaying time.

Our goal was to create a diagnostic tool that would make possible to quickly determine, in the case of envenomation, which antivenom is necessary, or if it is necessary at all.

The current “solution”

Antivenom remains the most effective antidote against snake envenomings. However, it is expensive and in short supply. As a consequence, it is either unpractical or unavailable in rural and underdeveloped countries due to challenged public health systems and poor infrastructure. Furthermore, it is not straight forward to administer the proper antidote, as the snake responsible for the envenoming is long gone and identification of such snake species is not the specialty of the medical personnel at the clinics.

Click here for more details

References

[1] de Silva HA, Ryan NM, de Silva HJ (2016). Adverse reactions to snake antivenom, and their prevention and treatment. Br J Clin Pharmacol., 81(3):446-52/font>