Re‐elevation of serum amlodipine level after lipid emulsion therapy in an overdose case

Treatment Modalities in Calcium Channel Blocker Overdose: A Systematic Review

Calcium channel blocker poisoning is one of the most common poisonings encountered which presents with life-threatening complications. However, there is no unified approach for treating these patients in the existing literature. This study aimed to assess the effects of different treatment modalities used in calcium channel blocker poisoning, as reported by previous studies. The primary outcomes studied were mortality and hemodynamic parameters after treatment. The secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, length of intensive care unit stay, duration of vasopressor use, functional outcomes, and serum calcium channel blocker concentrations. A thorough literature search was performed through Ovid, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from January 2014 to December 31, 2022, to identify all studies analyzing the effects of the treatment of calcium channel blocker poisoning on the desired outcomes. Two reviewers reviewed 607 published articles from January 2014 to December 2022 to identify studies analyzing the effects of the treatment of calcium channel blocker poisoning on desired outcomes. In this review, 18 case reports, one case series, and one cohort study were included. Most patients were treated with an injection of calcium gluconate or calcium chloride. The use of calcium along with dopamine and norepinephrine was found to have lower mortality rates. A few patients were also treated with injection atropine for bradycardia. High-dose insulin therapy was used in 14 patients, of whom two did not survive. In the cohort study, 66 calcium channel blocker toxicity patients were included. These patients were treated with high-dose insulin therapy. A total of 11 patients with calcium channel blocker toxicity succumbed. Although it was found to be associated with improved hemodynamic parameters and lower mortality, side effects such as hypokalemia and hypoglycemia were noted. Intravenous lipid emulsion therapy (administered to eight patients), extracorporeal life support (used in three patients with refractory shock or cardiac arrest), injection glucagon, methylene blue, albumin infusion, and terlipressin were associated with a lower mortality rate as well as improvement in hemodynamic parameters. None of the case reports provided any information on end-organ damage on long-term follow-up.

Extracorporeal treatment for calcium channel blocker poisoning: systematic review and recommendations from the EXTRIP workgroup

BACKGROUND

Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are commonly used to treat conditions such as arterial hypertension and supraventricular dysrhythmias. Poisoning from these drugs can lead to severe morbidity and mortality. We aimed to determine the utility of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) in the management of CCB poisoning.

METHODS

We conducted systematic reviews of the literature, screened studies, extracted data, summarized findings, and formulated recommendations following published EXTRIP methods.

RESULTS

A total of 83 publications (6 in vitro and 1 animal experiments, 55 case reports or case series, 19 pharmacokinetic studies, 1 cohort study and 1 systematic review) met inclusion criteria regarding the effect of ECTR. Toxicokinetic or pharmacokinetic data were available on 210 patients (including 32 for amlodipine, 20 for diltiazem, and 52 for verapamil). Regardless of the ECTR used, amlodipine, bepridil, diltiazem, felodipine, isradipine, mibefradil, nifedipine, nisoldipine, and verapamil were considered not dialyzable, with variable levels of evidence, while no dialyzability grading was possible for nicardipine and nitrendipine. Data were available for clinical analysis on 78 CCB poisoned patients (including 32 patients for amlodipine, 16 for diltiazem, and 23 for verapamil). Standard care (including high dose insulin euglycemic therapy) was not systematically administered. Clinical data did not suggest an improvement in outcomes with ECTR. Consequently, the EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using ECTR in addition to standard care for patients severely poisoned with either amlodipine, diltiazem or verapamil (strong recommendations, very low quality of the evidence (1D)). There were insufficient clinical data to draft recommendation for other CCBs, although the workgroup acknowledged the low dialyzability from, and lack of biological plausibility for, ECTR.

CONCLUSIONS

Both dialyzability and clinical data do not support a clinical benefit from ECTRs for CCB poisoning. The EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using extracorporeal methods to enhance the elimination of amlodipine, diltiazem, and verapamil in patients with severe poisoning.