A Swine Model of Severe Propranolol Toxicity Permitting Direct Measurement of Brain Tissue Oxygenation

Effect of Methylene Blue on a Porcine Model of Amlodipine Toxicity

INTRODUCTION

Calcium channel blocker (CCB) overdoses cause significant morbidity and mortality. Dihydropyridine CCBs cause peripheral vascular dilation and at high doses cardiac dysfunction. Amlodipine, a dihydropyridine, causes peripheral vasodilation from release of nitric oxide (NO) in addition to calcium channel blockade; NO scavenging is a potential treatment. Methylene blue (MB) inhibits NO directly and inhibits NO production. We compared the effects of MB versus norepinephrine (NE), with time to death as the primary outcome, in a porcine amlodipine toxicity model.

METHODS

Animals were anesthetized and instrumented, and an amlodipine infusion was administered to mimic oral overdose. After 70 minutes, each group was resuscitated with normal saline. Animals in each group were then randomized to receive either MB or NE. Hemodynamic parameters, including mean arterial pressure and cardiac output, were recorded every 10 minutes. The primary outcome was survival time (Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test).

RESULTS

Interim analysis after 15 animals (7 MB, 8 NE) revealed that MB was clearly not superior to NE. Overall, 1 of 7 animals in the MB group survived to 300 minutes compared with 2 of 8 animals in the NE group. The median survival time was 100 minutes for the MB group and 177 minutes for the NE group. Survival time did not differ by group (log-rank test p = 0.29).

CONCLUSION

In this porcine model of amlodipine toxicity, methylene blue did not improve survival time compared with norepinephrine. Whether methylene blue is beneficial in combatting distributive shock in amlodipine toxicity remains unclear and requires further study.

Use of a Porcine Model to Evaluate the Risks and Benefits of Vasopressors in Propranolol Poisoning

INTRODUCTION

Vasopressors are a commonly used treatment in beta-blocker poisoning despite evidence they may be ineffective or harmful. The primary objective of the present study is to use previously collected data from two prior studies (high-dose insulin (HDI) versus vasopressin + epinephrine and a placebo-controlled HDI study) to compare survival between vasopressin + epinephrine and placebo. Secondary outcomes included a comparison with HDI as well as comparisons with hemodynamic parameters, including mean arterial pressure (MAP), cardiac output (CO), heart rate (HR), and systemic vascular resistance (SVR).

METHODS

Cardiogenic shock was induced in healthy pigs with a bolus of 0.5 mg/kg of intravenous propranolol followed by an infusion of 0.25 mg/kg/minute until the point of toxicity, defined as (0.75 × initial HR × initial MAP), at which point the infusion was reduced to 0.125 mg/kg/minute for 240 (vasopressin + epinephrine or HDI) or 360 minutes (placebo) or until death.

RESULTS

Survival was significantly lower in pigs receiving vasopressin + epinephrine (0%, 0/5) than in pigs receiving placebo (50%, 2/4) (p < 0.01). Survival was significantly higher with HDI compared with both groups (100%, 5/5) (p < 0.01). All vasopressin + epinephrine pigs died within 100 minutes after reaching toxicity. Over the course of the resuscitation, we observed a statistically significant steady decrease in CO and HR in the vasopressin + epinephrine group compared with placebo (p < 0.01). In contrast, we observed a statistically significant change in MAP and SVR that followed a parabolic arc, with MAP and SVR rising significantly initially in the vasopressin + epinephrine group then rapidly falling until death (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality was higher with vasopressors compared with placebo in this porcine model of propranolol poisoning. Further studies are warranted to define the optimal timing and role of vasopressors in beta-blocker poisoning.

Development and Feasibility of a Porcine Model of Amlodipine Toxicity

INTRODUCTION

Toxicity related to calcium-channel blockers remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Amlodipine-induced shock is unique in that its mechanism of action is thought to occur in part via the release of nitric oxide (NO) in the peripheral vasculature. Specific therapeutic interventions, including methylene blue (an NO scavenger), have been suggested, but efficacy studies are severely limited. To facilitate a larger porcine study into the effect of various interventions on amlodipine toxicity, we undertook this model development and feasibility study.

METHODS

Intravenous amlodipine was prepared by dissolving commercially obtained amlodipine tablets in dimethylsulfoxide. The concentration of the drug was verified using ultraviolet spectroscopy. We administered this solution to three animals in order to determine a toxic dose, capable of facilitating a two-arm study of amlodipine toxicity.

RESULTS

The first pig died rapidly after the bolus infusion. The second pig developed mild toxicity, but the dissolution of the plastic tubing by the solvent and subsequent leakage limited the interpretability of the result. The third animal developed expected toxicity with an infusion rate between 2.0  and 5.5 mg/kg/h.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a potentially repeatable model of amlodipine-induced toxic shock using intravenous administration of amlodipine and several methodological considerations for researchers undertaking similar work.