Life-threatening Chlorhexidine Anaphylaxis: A Case Report

Life-threatening chlorhexidine anaphylaxis caused by skin preparation before chlorhexidine-free central venous catheter insertion: a case report and literature review

Chlorhexidine is a common cause of perioperative anaphylaxis, and global regulatory authorities have issued warnings about anaphylaxis due to chlorhexidine-containing central venous catheters (CVC) and its mucosal absorption. We present a case of life-threatening anaphylaxis after CVC insertion caused by chlorhexidine used for skin preparation. The onset of anaphylaxis was rapid and very severe, resulting in pulseless electrical activity. The patient was successfully resuscitated by emergency veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Our case suggests that even skin preparation before chlorhexidine-free CVC insertion can cause life-threatening anaphylaxis. We reviewed the literature on chlorhexidine anaphylaxis cases and categorized all potential routes of chlorhexidine exposure to assess the risk following skin preparation. Our results showed that skin preparation before CVC insertion was the third most common cause of chlorhexidine anaphylaxis after transurethral exposure and chlorhexidine-containing CVCs. However, skin preparation with chlorhexidine before CVC insertion was sometimes overlooked as a cause of chlorhexidine anaphylaxis, and its risk might be underestimated. Further, no previous reports have described life-threatening anaphylaxis solely due to chlorhexidine skin preparation before CVC insertion. CVC insertion might cause the chlorhexidine used for skin preparation to reach the vascular system and should be recognized as a potential cause of life-threatening chlorhexidine anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis related to disinfection with chlorhexidine in a teenager treated for cancer

INTRODUCTION

Literature shows upcoming allergy to chlorhexidine due to the widespread use of the disinfectant within and outside surgical settings. Only a few case reports have been published regarding the use of topical chlorhexidine disinfectant outside surgery and only a minority of these within the pediatric population.

CASE REPORT

We present a case-report of a teenager, treated for acute lymphoblastic leukemia who developed an anaphylactic shock after repeated chlorhexidine use for skin disinfection at the insertion of a central venous catheter during his chemotherapy treatment. Preceding minor symptoms such as local swelling and pruritus were not recognized as possible allergy to chlorhexidine.Management and outcome: He was treated with two doses of intramuscular adrenaline and transferred to the pediatric intensive care unit where he fully recovered. Specific IgE testing was positive for chlorhexidine. A total avoidance of chlorhexidine was instructed.

DISCUSSION

A similar case was published regarding an anaphylaxis after use of chlorhexidine disinfectant for a dialysis catheter. Almost all other case reports of anaphylactic shock were found within surgical settings or after insertion of an impregnated central venous catheter/urine catheter. We suggest that some of the disinfectant might have been flushed in the catheter and then caused an anaphylactic reaction. The link between symptoms and chlorhexidine was not made until an anaphylactic reaction occurred. Literature data show that chlorhexidine often causes mild preceding symptoms before an anaphylaxis occurs. So let awareness arise around this 'hidden allergen' of which warning reactions often are being missed.

Multi-Center Outcomes of Chlorhexidine Oral Decontamination in Intensive Care Units

Background: The efficacy of oral chlorhexidine (oCHG) for decontamination in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of oCHG decontamination on the incidence of pneumonia, sepsis, and death in ICU patients. Methods: The Philips eICU database version 2.0 was queried for patients admitted to the ICU for ≥48 hours in 2014-2015. The primary outcome of interest was death in the ICU. Secondary outcomes were a diagnosis of pneumonia or sepsis. Patients with pneumonia or sepsis diagnosed within the first 48 hours of ICU admission were excluded from the outcome analyses. Univariable analysis was performed comparing age, gender, race, severity of illness scores, hospital characteristics, and oCHG order. Multivariable logistic regression was performed using univariable results with p < 0.05. Results: Of the 64,904 patients from 186 hospitals, 22.1% (n = 14,333) had oCHG ordered. The overall mortality rate was 6.9% (n = 4,449) and the mortality rate in patients receiving oCHG was 10.6% (n = 1,518; p < 0.001). After controlling for confounding factors, oCHG remained an independent risk factor for death (odds ratio [OR] 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.34). After excluding patients with an early diagnosis of pneumonia, the overall pneumonia incidence was 2.6% (n = 1,431) and the incidence in patients having oCHG was 4.2% (n = 517; p < 0.001). However, multivariable logistic regression revealed no significant difference in the risk of pneumonia with oCHG (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.85-1.09). After excluding patients with an early diagnosis of sepsis, the overall rate of sepsis was 1.8% (n = 949) and for patients with oCHG, the rate was 3.3% (n = 388; p < 0.001). After controlling for other confounders, oCHG remained an independent risk factor for sepsis (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.19-1.59). Conclusions: A chlorhexidine mouthwash order is associated with increased odds of death and sepsis without decreased odds of pneumonia in a heterogeneous cohort of ICU patients. Additional studies are needed to understand better the effect of oCHG on outcomes.

Chlorhexidine: a hidden life-threatening allergen

Chlorhexidine is a commonly used antiseptic and disinfectant in the health-care setting. Anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication. Epidemiologic data suggest that the cases of chlorhexidine allergy appears to be increasing. In this article we report a life-threatening anaphylactic shock with cardiorespiratory arrest, during urethral catheterization due to chlorhexidine. The authors also performed a literature review of PubMed library of anaphylactic cases reports due to this antiseptic between 2014 and 2018, demonstrating the increase in the number of cases occurring worldwide and the importance of detailed anamnesis and appropriate diagnostic workup of allergic reactions to disinfectants.

Chlorhexidine Allergy: On the Rise and Often Overlooked

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years, the risk of allergy to chlorhexidine is increasingly recognised. In this review, we discuss why the allergy is so easily overlooked and point out several preventative initiatives that can minimise the risk of both chlorhexidine sensitisation and allergy development and accidental re-exposure in patients with chlorhexidine allergy. Testing for chlorhexidine allergy is also discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Numerous reports have been published from many different specialties. Symptoms range from mild skin symptoms to life-threatening anaphylaxis. Testing for chlorhexidine allergy is based on skin testing and in vitro testing. Recently, it was found that both skin prick testing and specific IgE have high sensitivities and specificities. This review gives an overview of chlorhexidine allergy with a special focus on preventative initiatives and testing.