• Review Article
  • |
  • Open Access

“Krokodil”: The drug that kills

  • Sheila Leone;
    • Department of Pharmacy, “G. d’Annunzio” University, Chieti-Pescara, Italy
  • Anna Ferrari
    • Department of Diagnostic, Clinical and Public Health Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy
  • Corresponding Author(s): Sheila Leone

  • Department of Pharmacy, “G. d’Annunzio” University, Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy

  • sheila.leone@unich.it

  • +39-0871-3554754

  • Leone S (2018).

  • This Article is distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Received : Dec 29, 2017
Accepted : Mar 27, 2018
Published Online : Apr 11, 2018
Journal : Journal of Addiction and Recovery
Publisher : MedDocs Publishers LLC
Online edition : http://meddocsonline.org

Cite this article: Leone S, Ferrari A. “Krokodil”: The drug that kills. J Addict Recovery. 2018; 1: 1005.

Abstract

Psychotropic substances use and abuse have become a real global problem. Up to now, heroin is still one of the most abused drugs, however its consumption is in sharp decline in favor of Krokodil, also called “the poor’s heroine”. Krokodil originates from codeine that is extracted from antitussive and analgesic drugs, in “improvised” rudimentary laboratories and through artisan synthetic routes. Its low cost and easy procurement have allowed its rapid and dangerous spread.

The objective of this paper was to describe the epidemiology, chemistry, synthesis and toxicology of Krokodil.

Keywords: abused drugs

Story and evolution

      Krokodil’s origin is not well defined yet and the literature is rather vague [1]. Currently, there are no reported data on its use and spread, however it has been observed that its diffusion is due to the easy access to drugs containing codeine [2]. Furthermore, heroin deficiency contributed to Krokodil expansion. In fact, several authors have suggested that Krokodil has replaced traditional opioids [2,3]. The name Krokodil is due to the color of the skin of its consumers, scaly and greenish like a crocodile. Krokodil production probably emerged in Siberia and Eastern Russia about 15 years ago [4,5]. In May 2004, it was reported for the first time the description of Krokodil abuse, in the Republic of Komi, and in 2008, 5.000 Krokodil consumers were reported, out of a total estimated population of 20.000- 30.000. In addition, the number of Krokodil consumers in Russia has grown reaching about 5% of the population [6], while, according to others, the number of Russians consuming Krokodil would be higher, almost a million [3].

      Lately, about 50 Russian cities have reported the use of Krokodil [7]. Epidemiological data are worrisome and show how the use of Krokodil has reached epidemic proportions, in Russia and in Ukraine [6-9]. Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet countries have an ancient tradition in the production of opioids and stimulant drugs. There are several factors which have contributed to the spread of Krokodil in Russia and Ukraine, in particular the blocked import of heroin and the use of western drugs [5,8]. In Europe, its use was initially reported in Germany and in Northern Norway, while its use is growing in Kazakhstan, Georgia, the Czech Republic, France, Belgium and Sweden [5,10-12]. In 2011, German newspapers reported the first case of Krokodil abuse, defined as”Krok”. In the United States, possible cases of Krokodil abuse were reported between 2012 and 2013, in particular in Illinois, Oklahoma and in Chicago [13].

      According to various reports, Krokodil seems to spread throughout the American nation [14]. However, it has been estimated that the use of this drug in the US has spread since 2011, throughout the American nation, and has actually been available for much longer than originally intended. It is plausible that consumers initially were not aware of what they were taking, thinking that it was regular heroin, but then continued to use this substance for its cost 10 times lower and for its action more intense than heroine [13].

      Drug use tends to occur during adolescence, especially in the most isolated and poor areas [3]. Factors influencing the dissemination and use of Krokodil and other artisanal drugs are shaped by various psychological, social, economic, and political factors [15,16].

Chemistry and synthesis

      Discrepancies between online information around purification and making homemade drugs safer, and the synthesis of the same substances in a proper laboratory environment, exist [17].

      Krokodil is synthesized through a very simple chemical process consisting of two successive reactions. The required laboratory equipment is minimal, requires the use of highly toxic substances, but easily available and cheap: strong alkalis, hydrochloric acid, red phosphorus and finally organic solvents such as petrol, ethyl acetate or paint thinner [5]. The starting substance is codeine, derived from antitussive drugs or pain killers, which may also contain paracetamol or ephedrine. Generally, small amounts of this precursor are required, from 80 to 400 mg, and the process lasts about 40-45 minutes [18].

      Two steps are required: (i) codeine extraction from the drug and (ii) codeine molecule reduction in what is believed to be desomorphine. This reduction process is known as the Nagai method and is based on a reduction method with hydriodic acid and red phosphorus as reagents, often also used for the synthesis of illegal methamphetamine [19].

      ((i) Codeine extraction: The first step consists in the extraction of the codeine from tablets or syrup. Initially, it is mixed with strong alkalis, such as sodium hydroxide, with a diluent agent that may contain lead, ferric or ferrous and antimony agents, and other organic solvents, while subsequently a strong acid is added, such as hydrochloric acid obtained from batteries or industrial products. Petrol may be used as organic solvent, although some users have reported the use of paint thinners.

      (ii) Reduction of desomorphine codeine: Codeine is mixed with iodine, water and red phosphorus in glasses or glass containers or in enamelled pots. The resulting mixture is heated, producing hydriodic acid, a very strong acid which has been used to reduce carbonyl groups, nitriles, halides and alcohols for more than 100 years [20]. The reduction process is carried out using directly hydriodic acid or iodine and red phosphorus which form the acid in situ. Iodine is extracted from medical solutions or used as crystal, while red phosphorus is usually obtained from match heads.

      The role of phosphorus is to reconvert the molecular iodine, formed during the reaction, into hydriodic acid [21]. The reaction involves a cyclic oxidation of iodide anions to iodine and the subsequent reduction of iodide to iodine by the red phosphorus which instead is converted into phosphoric or phosphoric acid [22]. This step allows the cleavage of the methoxyl group of codeine to form a hydroxyl group. The solution is ready when the mixture has changed its color and smell. The final product is a caramel-colored solution with an acrid smell that is injected into the vein [6]. However, there are limitations on possible production methods and it is important to assess how secondary reactions can affect final drug performance. Numerous descriptions of Krokodil production are reported in the literature [17], weak bases such as cigarette ash or bicarbonate are often found after the reaction has been completed [23]. A key question is whether the synthetic way followed actually produces desomorphine. The classical synthesis of desomorphine involves the reaction between codeine and thionyl chloride, leading to the formation of α-chlorocodide, and subsequently a reduction and a final demethylation [24]. However, using gas chromatography, Savchuk and coworkers identify 4 synthetic analogues of desomorphine, such as methyldesomorphine, 3,6-dideoxy-dihydromorphine, morphinan-4,5-epoxy-3-ol, and didehydro desomorphine, as well as traces of codeine and other compounds, with a desomorphine content up to 75% [25-27]. However, there is a variability in desomorphine concentrations on the basis of the different synthesis processes [27,28]. Furthermore, it should be noted that codeine formulations almost always contain other ingredients, such as paracetamol, caffeine etc. It is not perfectly known yet how each of these compounds affects the chemical reactions and the final result. The Krokodil psychoactive effects may therefore depend on the type of medicine, chemical substances, reagents available locally and actual reaction used. Further analysis is needed to define the actual drug constituents [5]. Recently, Soares and collaborators (2017) reported a total of 54 detected morphinans, highlighting the fact that these additional morphinans may contribute to the psychotropic effects of krokodil.

Toxicology

      The desomorphine, semi-synthetic opioid, is the pharmacological active molecule of Krokodil that by binding to μ and δ receptors induces euphoria and anxiolytic effect. Desomorphine, like heroin and morphine, activates the μ receptors on GABA-ergic neurons, causing abundant dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens. Furthermore the desomorphine activates the δ receptors in the locus coeruleus interfering with the release of noradrenaline.

      The desomorphine induces tolerance, dependence and abstinence syndrome, with an average survival of about 2 years. Tolerance to desomorphine is pharmacodynamics. The μ and δ receptors are rapidly internalized through the classic endocytic pathway (down regulation) [29,30]. The desomorphine, contained in the Krokodil, is able to induce a strong dependence, both psychic and physical, in a short time.

      The abstinence syndrome is characterized by anxiety, irritability and insomnia.

      However, it is divided into 6 phases:

      • Phase I (6 to 14 hours after the last dose): craving, anxiety, irritability, sweating, and dysphoria (mild to moderate).
• Phase II (14 to 18 hours after the last dose): profuse sweating, mild depression, crying, rhinorrhea, dysphoria.
• Phase III (16 to 24 hours after the last dose): rhinorrhoea, dilated pupils, piloerection, muscle spasms, hot flashes, painful bones and muscles, loss of appetite, start of intestinal cramps.
• Phase IV (24 to 36 hours after the last dose): severe cramps and involuntary leg movements, loose stools, insomnia, increased blood pressure, increased respiration rate, tachycardia, agitation, nausea.
• Phase V (36 to 72 hours after the last dose): increased vomiting, frequent diarrhea, weight loss up to 2-5 kg every 24 hours. The subject takes a fetal position.
• Phase VI (after completion of the previous phases) i: slow recovery of appetite and normal intestinal function, with symptoms mainly of a psychological nature, but may also include greater sensitivity to pain, hypertension, colitis or other gastrointestinal symptoms [3,6,18].

      Krokodil shows signs of toxicity not only related to the presence of desomorphine, but also from the high concentration of toxic substances used in its synthesis [2,5,18].

      Neurological, endocrine, ulcer and skin rashes have been reported due to the presence of toxic metals (lead and zinc) and corrosive substances such as paint thinner, petrol and even hydrochloric acid, iodine and red phosphorus used for its preparation [31]. This leads to the decay of the skin and muscles around the injection site and, over time, the skin becomes scaly due to the rupture of blood vessels, often exposing the underlying bone [20,32]. Finally, widespread inflammation, abscesses and even decomposition is observed. This explains why Krokodil is nicknamed “carnivorous drug” [2,5].

      The recovery of Krokodil addiction is minimal. The initial intervention involves the removal of necrotic tissue and broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy (penicillin G, clindamycin, vancomycin, and gentamicin). Unfortunately, in more severe cases, surgical amputation may be necessary [33] or maxillofacial interventional intervention [34-36]. In Krokodil’s consumer, because of his lethality, detoxification is almost impossible. Methadone and buprenorphine represent the replacement drugs used today, both during the weaning phase and in the maintenance phase.

      The Krokodil, appeared and spread initially in Russia, is no longer a problem limited to the Eastern European countries, but a global threat, so it is necessary to deepen the studies on its composition and its toxicity, as well as implement the right rules precautionary measures to prevent a dangerous spread.

      The consumption of Krokodil fits into a multi-faceted high-risk environment, composed of a multitude of macro and micro risk factors that have favored its spread and lethality. Among these there are: the rudimentary chemical synthesis and the use of corrosive contaminants; the frequency of injection; the artisan production environment; the lack of availability of replacement therapies; poverty, social exclusion; the increase in the price of heroin and its shortage in the markets.

Conclusion

      A trans-disciplinary research effort is needed to comprehensively understand all aspects of this recent and alarming drug trend.

      From the chemical point of view, it is necessary to understand the qualitative and quantitative composition of the substances that go under the name of Krokodil. The active ingredient of Krokodil is in fact presumed to be desomorphine, but the real solution injected can contain various opioid alkaloids, which could derive from codeine, depending on the available reagents, reaction times and temperatures, and ultimately, from the competences chemicals of the Krokodil producer [5].

      Understanding its real composition is essential to provide more information for the development of programs for harm reduction and for potentially safer production processes. Therefore, laboratory analyzes of Krokodil samples are necessary to assess the presence of any contaminants, determine the possible neurological consequences on hospitalized Krokodil consumers, to increase understanding of the effects on the human body and contribute to an effective treatment.

References

  1. Azbel L, Dvoryak S, Altice FL. ‘Krokodil’ and what a long strange trip it’s been. Int J Drug Policy. 2013; 24: 279-280.
  2. Gahr M, Freudenmann RW, Hiemke C, Gunst IM, Connemann BJ, Schönfeldt-Lecuona C. Desomorphine goes “crocodile”. J Addict Dis. 2012; 31: 407-412.
  3. Shuster S. The curse of the crocodile: Russia’s deadly designer drug. Time [Internet]. 2011.
  4. Shelton M, Ramirez-Fort MK, Lee KC, Ladizinski B. Krokodil: from Russia with love. JAMA Dermatol. 2015; 151: 32.
  5. Grund JP, Latypov A, Harris M. Breaking worse: the emergence of krokodil and excessive injuries among people who inject drugs in Eurasia. Int J Drug Policy. 2013; 24: 265-274.
  6. Walker S. Krokodil: The drug that eats junkies. Independent. co.uk. 2011.
  7. Booth RE, Davis JM, Brewster JT, Lisovska O, Dvoryak S. Krokodile Injectors in Ukraine: Fueling the HIV Epidemic? AIDS Behav. 2016; 20: 369-376.
  8. Booth RE. ‘Krokodil’ and other home-produced drugs for injection: a perspective from Ukraine. Int J Drug Policy. 2013; 24: 277- 278.
  9. Mathers BM, Degenhardt L, Phillips B, Wiessing L, Hickman M, Strathdee SA, Wodak A, Panda S, Tyndall M, Toufik A, Mattick RP; 2007 Global epidemiology of injecting drug use and HIV among people who inject drugs: a systematic review. Reference Group to the UN on HIV and Injecting Drug Use. Lancet. 2008; 372: 1733-1745.
  10. Skowronek R, Celiński R, Chowaniec C.”Crocodile”--new dangerous designer drug of abuse from the East. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2012; 50: 269.
  11. Harris M. The ‘do-it-yourself’ New Zealand injecting scene: implications for harm reduction.Int J Drug Policy. 2013; 24: 281- 283.
  12. Piralishvili G, Gamkrelidze I, Nikolaishvili N, Chavchanidze M. Needs assessment and treatment compliance at state opioid substitution treatment programes in Georgia.Georgian Med News. 2013; 214: 28-32.
  13. Matiuk DM. Krokodil: A monstrous drug with deadly consequences. J Addict Disord Breining Institute. 2014.
  14. Rech MA, Donahey E, Cappiello Dziedzic JM, Oh L, Greenhalgh E. New drugs of abuse. Pharmacotherapy. 2015; 35: 189-197.
  15. Heimer R. Patterns of new drug emergence: a comment in light of ‘krokodil’. Int J Drug Policy. 2013; 24: 275-277.
  16. Hearne E, Grund JPC, Van Hout MC, McVeigh J. A scoping review of home-produced heroin and amphetamine-type stimulant substitutes: implications for prevention, treatment, and policy. Harm Reduct J. 2016; 13: 14.
  17. Hearne E, Alves EA, Van Hout MC, Grund JC. Home Manufacture of Drugs: An Online Investigation and a Toxicological Reality Check of Online Discussions on Drug Chemistry. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2017; 49: 279-288.
  18. Katselou M, Papoutsis I, Nikolaou P, Spiliopoulou C, Athanaselis S. A “krokodil” emerges from the murky waters of addiction. Abuse trends of an old drug.Life Sci. 2014; 102: 81-87.
  19. Kunalan V, Kerr WJ, Daéid NN. Investigation of the reaction impurities associated with methylamphetamine synthesized using the Nagai method. Anal Chem. 2012; 84: 5744-5752.
  20. Alves EA, Grund JP, Afonso CM, Netto AD, Carvalho F, DinisOliveira RJ. The harmful chemistry behind krokodil (desomorphine) synthesis and mechanisms of toxicity. Forensic Sci Int. 2015; 249: 207-213.
  21. Windahl KL, McTigue MJ, Pearson JR, Pratt SJ, Rowe JE, Sear EM. Investigation of the impurities found in methamphetamine synthesised from pseudoephedrine by reduction with hydriodic acid and red phosphorus. Forensic Sci Int. 1995; 76: 97-114.
  22. Skinner HF. Methamphetamine synthesis via hydriodic acid/red phosphorus reduction of ephedrlne. Forensic Sci Int. 1990; 48: 123-134.
  23. Abdala N, Grund JP, Tolstov Y, Kozlov AP, Heimer R. Can homemade injectable opiates contribute to the HIV epidemic among injection drug users in the countries of the former Soviet Union? Addiction. 2006; 101: 731-737.
  24. Eddy NB, Howes HA. Studies of morphine, codeine and their derivatives X. Desomorphine-C: desoxycodeine-C and their hydrogenated derivatives. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1935; 55: 257-267.
  25. Neves JF, Alves EA, Soares JX, Cravo SM, Silva AM, Pereira Netto AD, Carvalho F, Dinis-Oliveira RJ, Afonso CM. Data analysis of “krokodil” samples obtained by street-like synthesis. Data Brief. 2015; 6: 83-88.
  26. Florez DH, Dos Santos Moreira AM, da Silva PR, Brandão R, Borges MM, de Santana FJ, Borges KB. Desomorphine (Krokodil): An overview of its chemistry, pharmacology, metabolism, toxicology and analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017; 173: 59-68.
  27. Savchuk SA, Barsegyan SS, Barsegyan IB, Kolesov GM. Chromatographic study of expert and biological samples containing desomorphine. Journal of Analytical Chemistry. 2008; 63: 361-370.
  28. Soares JX, Alves EA, Silva AMN, de Figueiredo NG, Neves JF, Cravo SM, Rangel M, Netto ADP, Carvalho F, Dinis-Oliveira RJ, Afonso CM.Street-Like Synthesis of Krokodil Results in the Formation of an Enlarged Cluster of Known and New Morphinans.Chem Res Toxicol. 2017; 30: 1609-1621.
  29. Dang VC, Christie MJ. Mechanisms of rapid opioid receptor desensitization, resensitization and tolerance in brainneurons. Br J Pharmacol. 2012; 165: 1704-1716.
  30. Just S, Illing S, Trester-Zedlitz M, Lau EK, Kotowski SJ, Miess E, Mann A, Doll C, Trinidad JC, Burlingame AL, von Zastrow M, Schulz S. Differentiation of opioid drug effects by hierarchical multi-site phosphorylation. Mol Pharmacol. 2013; 83: 633-639.
  31. Mullins ME, Schwarz ES. Commentary on “A new drug with a nasty bite: A case of krokodil-induced skin necrosis in an intravenous drug user”. JAAD Case Rep. 2016; 2: 418.
  32. Alves EA, Brandão P, Neves JF, Cravo SM, Soares JX, Grund JC, Duarte JA, Afonso CMM, Pereira Netto AD, Carvalho F, DinisOliveira RJ. Repeated subcutaneous administrations of krokodil causes skin necrosis and internal organs toxicity in Wistar rats: putative human implications. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2017; 32.
  33. Poghosyan YM, Hakobyan KA, Poghosyan AY, Avetisyan EK.Surgical treatment of jaw osteonecrosis in “Krokodil” drug addicted patients. Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014; 42: 1639-1643.
  34. Hakobyan KA. The state of oral cavity in drug addicted patients with jaw osteonecrosis who use the drug “Crocodile” (desomorphine). Bull Stomatol Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 1: 16–19.
  35. Malanchuk VO, Kopchak AV, Brodetskiy IS. Clinical features of jaw osteomyelitis in drug addicted patients. Ukr Med J. 2007; 4: 111–117.
  36. Hakobyan K, Poghosyan Y. Spontaneous bone formation after mandible segmental resection in “krokodil” drug-related jaw osteonecrosis patient: case report. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 21: 267-270.

MedDocs Publishers

We always work towards offering the best to you. For any queries, please feel free to get in touch with us. Also you may post your valuable feedback after reading our journals, ebooks and after visiting our conferences.