Assessment of diazepam loading dose therapy of delirium tremens

Metabolic diversity as a reason for unsuccessful detoxification from benzodiazepines: the rationale for serum BZD concentration monitoring

PURPOSE

Many harms secondary to benzodiazepine (BZD) dependence force users towards detoxification treatment. However, even strongly motivated patients tolerate the process badly or experience early relapse. The detoxification procedure has not yet been standardized. The objective of this paper is to examine the hypothesis that faulty detoxification routines may have caused some failures.

METHODS

The detoxification approaches found in the literature were compared stage by stage. The review was used to identify possible common, across-the-board systematic errors.

RESULTS

The presented literature review confirms that the widespread divergence in the BZD metabolism rate is effectively neglected during detoxification routines. Without laboratory measurements, these differences, additionally interfered with by auxiliary drugs, undermine not only the scheduled but even the symptom-driven procedures. An initial substitution with a long-acting BZD, although recommended, may lead to over-accumulation. This excess, varying between patients and incompatible with the current tapering stage, may lead to repeated overestimation of the patient's adjustments to reduced doses. Consequently, the patient's good clinical presentation at withdrawal, resulting in a conclusion of detoxification, may actually reflect a persistently high serum BZD concentration. The low-concentration stage, if shifted past the end of treatment, exposes patients to unexpected, unassisted withdrawal crises. With laboratory feedback, these crises, unlike the symptoms related to deficient re-adaptation mechanisms, could be prevented. Moreover, by minimizing the high-concentration phase, time can be saved for properly assisted low-concentration challenges.

CONCLUSION

A customized detoxification procedure driven not only by the intensity of withdrawal symptoms but also by serum BZD monitoring may prevent some failures. As the standard regimen, it would make detoxification from BZDs more reliable and effective.

Front-loaded diazepam versus lorazepam for treatment of alcohol withdrawal agitated delirium

BACKGROUND

Front-loaded diazepam is used to rapidly control agitation in patients with severe alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS). Our institution began using front-loaded lorazepam in August 2017 secondary to a nation-wide shortage of intravenous (IV) diazepam. Currently, there are no studies comparing lorazepam to diazepam for frontloading in severe AWS.

METHOD

Retrospective cohort study of all adults presenting to the emergency department with a diagnosis of AWS and prescribed the institution's alcohol withdrawal agitated delirium protocol 8 months pre and post shortage of IV diazepam were eligible inclusion for the study. Of these, 106 patients were front-loaded with diazepam and 70 patients were front-loaded with lorazepam.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the mean change in Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised scores 24 h pre and post front-loading in the two groups (-13.9 ± -8.08 vs. -13.1 ± -8.91, p = 0.534). Patients who received front-loaded lorazepam had an increased incidence of ICU-delirium (positive for the Confusion Assessment Method in the ICU: 75% with lorazepam vs. 52.6% with diazepam, p = 0.009) and a higher risk of over-sedation, but this did not reach statistical significance (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score < -1: 32.1% with lorazepam vs. 18.2% with diazepam, p = 0.063).

CONCLUSION

Front-loaded lorazepam was similar to front-loaded diazepam in controlling AWS symptoms. Lorazepam's delayed onset of action should be considered when determining how quickly repeat doses are administered to avoid the potential for adverse drug events.

Evaluation of a symptom-triggered front-loading detoxification technique for alcohol dependence: A pilot study

Aims and Methods

A pilot study was set up to compare a symptom-triggered ‘front-loading’ detoxification technique with the usual fixed dosage method. A group of 23 in-patients with alcohol dependence were randomised to receive either the intervention technique using diazepam or the standard chlordiazepoxide taper over 10 days.

Results

The intervention group received a mean dosage of 74 mg diazepam (equivalent to 222 mg chlordiazepoxide) compared with 700 mg chlordiazepoxide in those receiving usual treatment. There was no statistical difference in the severity of alcohol withdrawal symptoms in the two groups, and the intervention group were slightly more satisfied with their treatment than the group undergoing the usual detoxification treatment. Feedback from the nursing staff was positive towards the new approach but highlighted some potential problems for its wider implementation.

Clinical Implications

It was possible to use a simple randomised trial design to introduce a new technique for alcohol detoxification to a specialist unit. Symptom-triggered front-loading detoxification using diazepam was as effective as a standard taper technique in terms of withdrawal severity reduction, and was acceptable to both patients and staff. This is potentially a useful technique for busy acute psychiatric wards.

Diazepam in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Alcohol Withdrawal

Benzodiazepines ameliorate or prevent the symptoms and complications of moderate to severe alcohol withdrawal, which can include autonomic hyperactivity, agitation, combativeness, hallucinations, seizures, delirium, and death. The benzodiazepines most commonly used for this purpose are lorazepam, chlordiazepoxide, oxazepam, and diazepam. It is widely asserted that no member of this group is superior to the others for treatment of alcohol withdrawal. However, of these, diazepam has the shortest time to peak effect, which facilitates both rapid control of symptoms and accurate titration to avoid over-sedation. Furthermore, diazepam and its active metabolite, desmethyldiazepam, have the longest elimination half-lives, so their levels decrease in a gradual, self-tapering manner, resulting in a smoother withdrawal, i.e., a lower incidence and severity of both breakthrough symptoms and rebound phenomena, including a possibly decreased seizure risk. Importantly, the fear of increased risk of over-sedation with diazepam compared with other benzodiazepines is based on a misunderstanding of its pharmacokinetics and is unfounded. Similarly, the notion that diazepam should be avoided in patients with liver disease and elderly patients to avoid prolonged over-sedation is based on no more than conjecture. In fact, there is clinical evidence that diazepam is safe for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal in these patients when administered using a simple symptom-based approach. There is one instance in which diazepam should not be used: when intramuscular administration is the only option, the lipophilicity of diazepam can result in slow absorption-either lorazepam or, when rapid control of symptoms is required, midazolam should be used. The comparative pharmacokinetics of the benzodiazepines used in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal together with a comprehensive review of the literature on their use strongly suggest that diazepam should be the preferred benzodiazepine for the treatment of patients experiencing moderate to severe alcohol withdrawal under most circumstances.

Treatment of Severe Alcohol Withdrawal

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 50% of patients with alcohol dependence experience alcohol withdrawal. Severe alcohol withdrawal is characterized by seizures and/or delirium tremens, often refractory to standard doses of benzodiazepines, and requires aggressive treatment. This review aims to summarize the literature pertaining to the pharmacotherapy of severe alcohol withdrawal.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed (January 1960 to October 2015) was searched using the search termsalcohol withdrawal, delirium tremens, intensive care, andrefractory Supplemental references were generated through review of identified literature citations.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Available English language articles assessing pharmacotherapy options for adult patients with severe alcohol withdrawal were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A PubMed search yielded 739 articles for evaluation, of which 27 were included. The number of randomized controlled trials was limited, so many of these are retrospective analyses and case reports. Benzodiazepines remain the treatment of choice, with diazepam having the most favorable pharmacokinetic profile. Protocolized escalation of benzodiazepines as an alternative to a symptom-triggered approach may decrease the need for mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. Propofol is appropriate for patients refractory to benzodiazepines; however, the roles of phenobarbital, dexmedetomidine, and ketamine remain unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe alcohol withdrawal is not clearly defined, and limited data regarding management are available. Protocolized administration of benzodiazepines, in combination with phenobarbital, may reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and lead to shorter ICU stays. Propofol is a viable alternative for patients refractory to benzodiazepines; however, the role of other agents remains unclear. Randomized, prospective studies are needed to clearly define effective treatment strategies.

Treatment variability and outcome differences in the emergency department management of alcohol withdrawal

Objective:

Evidence suggests that symptom-triggered benzodiazepine treatment for patients with alcohol withdrawal reduces complication rates and emergency department lengths of stay. Our objective was to describe the management of alcohol withdrawal in 2 urban emergency departments.

Methods:

A structured chart audit was performed for patients with alcohol-related problems who presented to 2 Toronto hospitals over a 2-year period.

Results:

A total of 209 emergency department charts were audited. Patient characteristics were similar in both hospitals. None of the patients had been assessed using the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol (CIWA-Ar) scale. Patients at one hospital received substantially higher mean diazepam doses (64 mg v. 26 mg; p &lt; 0.001) than did the patients at the other hospital, and the patients at the first hospital had fewer seizures during their emergency department stay (1% v. 9%; p = 0.012). Patients spent an average of 9 hours and 40 minutes in the emergency department.

Conclusion:

There is significant variability in the documentation and treatment of alcohol withdrawal. Lower benzodiazepine doses are associated with higher rate of withdrawal seizures and prolonged emergency department length of stay. A standardized approach using symptom-triggered management is likely to improve outcomes for patients presenting with alcohol withdrawal.

Clinical management of alcohol withdrawal: A systematic review

Alcohol withdrawal is commonly encountered in general hospital settings. It forms a major part of referrals received by a consultation-liaison psychiatrist. This article aims to review the evidence base for appropriate clinical management of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome. We searched Pubmed for articles published in English on pharmacological management of alcohol withdrawal in humans with no limit on the date of publication. Articles not relevant to clinical management were excluded based on the titles and abstract available. Full-text articles were obtained from this list and the cross-references. There were four meta-analyses, 9 systematic reviews, 26 review articles and other type of publications like textbooks. Alcohol withdrawal syndrome is a clinical diagnosis. It may vary in severity. Complicated alcohol withdrawal presents with hallucinations, seizures or delirium tremens. Benzodiazepines have the best evidence base in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal, followed by anticonvulsants. Clinical institutes withdrawal assessment-alcohol revised is useful with pitfalls in patients with medical comorbidities. Evidence favors an approach of symptom-monitored loading for severe withdrawals where an initial dose is guided by risk factors for complicated withdrawals and further dosing may be guided by withdrawal severity. Supportive care and use of vitamins is also discussed.

The role of diazepam loading for the treatment of alcohol withdrawal syndrome in hospitalized patients

BACKGROUND

Alcohol withdrawal accounts for a significant amount of hospital admissions and can quickly progress to the development of delirium tremens (DTs), seizures, and death. Rapid identification and management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is vital and can be managed with a number of different treatment strategies. Diazepam loading is a treatment strategy that utilizes the pharmacokinetics of this agent to achieve a rapid reduction in symptoms followed by sustained benefit over a period of days.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to evaluate the role of diazepam loading for AWS.

METHODS

A literature search of four databases-Pubmed, PsychInfo, Biosis, and Embase-was conducted to identify publications between 1960 and August 2011 that described the use of diazepam loading for the treatment of AWS. Eight trials, both open-label and controlled trials were identified. Only four randomized controlled-trials (RCTs) have been published and they are reviewed in this paper.

RESULTS

Included trials of hospitalized inpatients found that diazepam loading provided rapid symptom relief as well as reduced the incidence of seizures and duration of DTs. In patients diagnosed with severe DTs, rapidly administered doses of diazepam produced a quick calming effect. While no adverse events resulting from diazepam loading were noted, no formal assessment tool was used to evaluate its safety. Larger randomized controlled-trials are needed to better evaluate safety outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Diazepam loading is an effective treatment option for hospitalized patients experiencing AWS. Diazepam loading uses the concept of symptom-triggered therapy, a mainstay of current AWS treatment, while exploiting its prolonged elimination half-life and eliminating the need for additional pharmacologic therapy. Studies reviewed found diazepam loading significantly improved a number of important outcomes in AWS, including time in DTs, compared to traditional treatment strategies.

Resistant alcohol withdrawal: does an unexpectedly large sedative requirement identify these patients early?

INTRODUCTION

While most patients with alcohol withdrawal (AW) respond to standard treatment that includes doses of benzodiazepines, nutrition and good supportive care (non resistant alcohol withdrawal-NRAW), a subgroup may resist therapy (resistant alcohol withdrawal-RAW). This study describes a distinct group of AW patients, their sedative requirements, and hospital courses.

METHODS

Over a period of 6 months, AW patients requiring 50 mg diazepam IV in the first hour were followed. We recorded admission indices and diazepam doses with vital signs at 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, and 24 hours. Patients were considered to have RAW if they required additional sedatives for control of symptoms and/or were having persistent abnormal vital signs despite the physicians' choices of therapy.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were enrolled; all had similar admission indices. While the 4 NRAW had normal vital signs within 3 hours, all 15 RAW patients had abnormal vital signs; 15 RAW patients required escalating diazepam doses--14 required barbiturates, 7 were intubated, and 5 had hypotension. Comparing groups: interval and total diazepam doses were not different at 1,2, and 3 hours; interval doses at 6 and 12 hours, and total doses at 6, 12, and 24 hours were significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

RAW patients require large doses of benzodiazepine administration, additional sedatives, and undergo complicated hospitalizations.

Reliability of Multidimensional Substance Abuse Treatment Matching

For meaningful adoption, the Patient Placement Criteria (PPC) of the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) will need adequate interrater reliability. In a decision analysis of the original PPC, we reduced potential sources of unreliability, mapped question items from clinical research instruments to each decision point, and programmed the item map as a computerized structured interview. Then, target videotapes from eight substance dependent adults who had been distributed by the algorithm into three levels of care (LOC) were independently scored by four raters who were blind as to ASAM LOC. The intraclass correlation coefficient for ASAM LOC assignment was .77. For all but two subscales of component instruments, values were above .70 and significant, indicating high interrater reliability. With these methods, excellent reliability is possible for complex decision trees, making it possible to improve the validity of the ASAM Criteria and similar complex hierarchical clinical protocols.

Introducing an in-patient treatment for alcohol detoxification into a community setting

Alcohol detoxification in the UK is not standardized and treatment is usually determined by local policies. Drug regimens are often predetermined and unrelated to the extent and duration of dependence, recent consumption, or previous withdrawal symptoms. Diazepam loading shortens the detoxification period and avoids the indiscriminate use of medication. It has been shown to be effective as an in-patient treatment. This paper examines the feasibility of introducing diazepam loading in a community setting, and discusses the implications that this would have for clinical practice.

Withdrawal syndromes

The pathophysiology of substance withdrawal is elucidated by a review of classic and cutting-edge research. The manifestation and evaluation of the associated withdrawal syndromes from ethanol, sedative-hypnotics, opioids, and baclofen, are compared. The general management of and pharmacotherapy for these patients are discussed.

David R. Boyd lecture in trauma care and emergency medical systems: "The surgical complications of toxins."

Toxins have had major roles in our societies for thousands of years. Interactions between surgeons, both generalists and subspecialists, and those caring for poisoned patients have been extensive throughout history. The advancement of the science of toxicology, the development of regional poison control centers, the development of emergency medicine, and the development of the subspecialty of medical toxicology have led to more appropriate and creative interactions between medical toxicologists, emergency physicians, and surgeons. This article will review the diverse interfaces between the medical toxicologist and the surgeon.