Recreational gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) use, although less common than other substance use, is increasingly recognised and is over-represented in emergency toxicology presentations. This narrative review summarizes GHB pharmacology, current patterns of use, potential harms and management of GHB toxicity and withdrawal. There is a complex interplay between GHB and GABA as GHB is both a prodrug and metabolite of GABA and GHB activates both GHB and GABA receptors. GHB is rapidly absorbed, with effects seen within minutes of ingestion. Metabolism is non-linear at higher doses. While GHB is listed as a controlled substance, its precursor's gamma-butyrolactone (GBL) and 1,4-butanediol (1,4-BD) are easily available as both have industrial applications. National surveys indicate low rates of GHB use, with identification of high-risk populations in men who have sex with men and polysubstance users. GHB is one of the three drugs most commonly used in chemsex. GHB is often co-ingested with other interacting psychoactive substances. Acute toxicity is dose-dependent, and management is supportive care. Withdrawal management is generally with benzodiazepines with addition of baclofen for more severe withdrawal. Barbiturates may have a role. Titration and tapering of pharmaceutical GHB is commonly used in the Netherlands. Complicated withdrawal with delirium may require intensive care and treatment with intravenous sedation. There are high rates of relapse after withdrawal and medications for longerterm management are currently being investigated. Chronic use is associated with poorer mental, physical and sexual health, social dysfunction and poor work performance. Laboratory detection is complicated as GHB is an endogenous substance with a short halflife, and therefore not often routinely assayed in the clinical setting. Future research should focus on improving GHB detection and management of GHB withdrawal and dependence. Interventions specific for high-risk groups should be developed and assessed.

Introduction and Aims. North America has witnessed a dramatic rise in fatal opioid overdoses due to the unwitting consumption of non-pharmaceutical fentanyl and its analogues. While some of the drivers of this crisis-including profitability and access to high-potency opioids through internet sources-also apply in Australia, to our knowledge, there have been no ongoing surveillance studies of local populations. Therefore, this pilot study aimed to detect unintentional fentanyl consumption among people who inject heroin through instant urine screening, and determine the feasibility and acceptability of voluntary urinalysis of clients at the Medically Supervised Injecting Centre, Kings Cross, Sydney. Design and Methods. Brief surveys and urine drug screens were conducted with 67 participants in Wave 1 (October 2017) and 51 participants in Wave 2 (March 2018). Urine samples were tested with BTNX Rapid Response™ fentanyl urine strip test at a detection level of 20 ng/mL norfentanyl. These strips also cross-react to numerous fentanyl analogues. Results. There were no cases where positive urine tests suggested unwitting fentanyl use detected in this study. Discussion and Conclusions. These negative findings contrast sharply with similar Canadian studies. While no cases of fentanyl-laced heroin use have been detected so far, we have demonstrated that this surveillance design is low-cost, feasible and scalable approach to monitoring the considerable public-health threat of undetected fentanyl and its analogues in Australia. Further validation of cross-reactivity of test strips would strengthen this method. [Barratt MJ, Latimer J, Jauncey M, Tay E, Nielsen S. Urine drug screening for early detection of unwitting use of fentanyl and its analogues among people who inject heroin in Sydney, Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev 2018;37:847-850]

No abstract