| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
Section of Critical Care Medicine, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Ali H. Al-Khafaji, MD, Section of Critical Care Medicine, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756. Address e-mail to Ali.H.Al-Khafaji{at}Hitchcock.org
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
IMPLICATIONS: We report a case of toxicity from the drug solvent propylene glycol resulting from prolonged, large-dose lorazepam infusion. The case is unusual in that toxicity developed during continuous veno-venous hemofiltration with dialysis, a renal replacement therapy that should been have been effective at eliminating the chemical and its metabolites.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Case Report |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Despite hemodialysis and later CVVHD, the patient developed a progressive, increased anion gap metabolic acidosis. On ICU day 30, the following laboratory values were obtained: pH 7.22, PCO2 41 mm Hg, HCO3- 16 meq/L, anion gap 20 mmol/L, ß-hydroxy-butyrate 0.1 mmol/L, phosphorus 2.7 mg/dL, blood urea nitrogen 67 mg/dL, and creatinine 1.2 mg/dL, glucose 144, serum albumin 2.0 g/dL, total bilirubin 9.9 mg/dL, alkaline phosphatase 330 U/L, aspartate transaminase (AST) 77 U/L, and alanine transaminase (ALT) 160 U/L. The plasma lactate level was 1.2 mmol/L and the serum osmolality was 344 mmol/L with an osmolar gap of 38. Propylene glycol toxicity was suspected because no alternative cause of an increased anion gap metabolic acidosis could be identified. Specifically, ketoacidosis, lactic acidosis, hyperphosphatemia, and other volatile alcohol toxicity were eliminated as potential causes by the laboratory studies presented. The lorazepam was discontinued and the patient was switched to midazolam infusion. The plasma propylene glycol level, drawn at the time the lorazepam was discontinued, was later reported to be 1308 mg/L. Within 48 h after the discontinuation of lorazepam infusion, the metabolic acidosis and anion gap had resolved, the osmolar gap decreased from 38 to 2, and there was no detectable propylene glycol level on repeat plasma assay. Unfortunately, the patient succumbed after a 10-wk course of unremitting multiorgan system failure.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The manifestations of propylene glycol toxicity include central nervous system depression, seizures, cardiac arrhythmias, respiratory arrest, hemolysis, and renal failure (2). The presence of an increased anion gap metabolic acidosis (with or without lactic acidosis), hyperosmolarity with an osmolar gap, and intravascular hemolysis may all be clues to the diagnosis of propylene glycol toxicity (2). Treatment of toxicity consists of discontinuing the propylene glycol-containing preparation, administering IV fluids, and dialysis (3). Although fomepizole, an alcohol dehydrogenase inhibitor, has been used in ethylene glycol toxicity, there are no reports of its use in the treatment of propylene glycol intoxication.
There have been prior case reports of propylene glycol toxicity associated with the infusion of nitroglycerine (4), lorazepam (2,5,6), diazepam (3), and etomidate (7). This is the first report of a patient who developed propylene glycol toxicity during renal replacement therapy. Although acute renal failure and continuing renal replacement therapy may complicate the interpretation of acid-base status, the appearance and resolution of otherwise unexplained, worsening anion gap acidosis and osmolar gap, coincident with the lorazepam infusion, implicates propylene glycol as the toxic agent in this patient. Renal replacement therapy was continuing and there was no evidence of recovery of allograft renal function during this time period.
Dialysis (either intermittent hemodialysis or CVVHD) is effective in clearing small molecular solutes including many organic acids. Although its use is accepted as therapy for severe ethylene glycol intoxication, we are aware of no published reports describing treatment of propylene glycol intoxication by any form of dialysis.
Because CVVHD is generally effective at clearing solute molecules of small size, such as propylene glycol, we were surprised that our patient developed propylene glycol toxicity while on CVVHD. One possibility is that CVVHD is less effective than expected in removing the drug. However, clearance of propylene glycol by CVVHD should be efficient owing to its small molecular size, high predicted sieving coefficient, and apparent volume of distribution that approximates body water. Nonetheless, it is evident from our patient that the maximal CVVHD clearance rate of propylene glycol can be exceeded during large-dose lorazepam infusion. It is possible, but not likely, that our patient received a sufficiently rapid rate of lorazepam infusion that propylene glycol toxicity would have occurred even in the presence of normal renal function. Although the maximal clearance rate of propylene glycol by normal humans is unknown, Speth et al. (8) found no evidence of lactic acidosis, hemolysis, or hyperosmolarity in subjects who received IV propylene glycol at 3 to 15 g/m2 over a period of 4 hours. Furthermore, based upon extrapolation from animal data, Morshed et al. (9) predicted a metabolic capacity of more than 1 g/day for a 70-kg human. At the time of the maximal infusion of lorazepam, our patient received propylene glycol at a rate of approximately 9 g/h (830 mg propylene glycol and 2 mg lorazepam per mL, at 11 mL/h), with an estimated cumulative dose of 108 g/m2 per day.
Our report demonstrates that CVVHD does not preclude the development of propylene glycol toxicity during continuous infusion of large-dose lorazepam. However, it did appear to treat the toxicity effectively, once the infusion of propylene glycol was stopped. The kinetics of propylene glycol elimination during CVVHD are not published and therefore it is unknown what infusion rate is required to cause toxicity. We suggest that when patients require rapid rates of continuous infusion of drugs containing propylene glycol, the possibility of toxicity from this vehicle must be considered, even in the setting of continuous renal replacement therapy. Alternative drugs that do not contain propylene glycol should be used where possible, especially in the setting of concomitant renal and/or hepatic dysfunction.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. L. Nelsen, C. E. Haas, B. Habtemariam, D. C. Kaufman, A. Partridge, S. Welle, and A. Forrest A Prospective Evaluation of Propylene Glycol Clearance and Accumulation During Continuous-Infusion Lorazepam in Critically Ill Patients J Intensive Care Med, May 1, 2008; 23(3): 184 - 194. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. W Neale, E. L Mesler, M. Young, J. A Rebuck, and W. J Weise Propylene Glycol-Induced Lactic Acidosis in a Patient with Normal Renal Function: A Proposed Mechanism and Monitoring Recommendations Ann. Pharmacother., October 1, 2005; 39(10): 1732 - 1735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. C. Wilson, C. Reardon, A. C. Theodore, and H. W. Farber Propylene Glycol Toxicity: A Severe Iatrogenic Illness in ICU Patients Receiving IV Benzodiazepines: A Case Series and Prospective, Observational Pilot Study Chest, September 1, 2005; 128(3): 1674 - 1681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|