Angioedema: 6 years experience with fourteen cases.

OBJECTIVE

To study the difference in the findings between the causes of angioedema and the characteristics of angioedema induced by angiotensin receptor II blockers (ARBs), and to investigate whether laboratory examinations for acute phase inflammatory markers can aid in diagnosis and predict airway risk.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed fourteen cases of patients with angioedema that were treated from 2000 to 2006. Data were collected regarding age, sex, location of the edema, cause, time course of resolution and laboratory examinations (leukocyte counts, serum C-reactive protein (CRP) level, complement function and the activity of C1 esterase inhibitor).

RESULTS

The causes of angioedema were ACEIs in six patients (42.9%), candesartan (ARB) in three (21.4%), HAE (types 1 and 2) in two, and unknown in three. Of these patients, 71.4% exhibited edema in the floor of the mouth, irrespective of the cause. Two patients with edema induced by candesartan exhibited both lingual and laryngeal edemas. The remaining one with candesartan-induced edema exhibited edema in the neck and mediastinum and pleural effusion. The average time to resolution was 4.1 days, ranging from one to twelve days. The edema in eleven patients resolved with conservative therapy, while three patients underwent tracheotomy. In two patients with candesartan-induced edema, although the edemas resolved completely after cessation of candesartan administration, the edemas reappeared in the same locations, two and thirty days after the cessation of candesartan for each patient. None of the patients with angioedema induced by ACEIs exhibited elevation of serum CRP levels. No significant differences were found for leukocyte counts and serum CRP levels between patients with angioedemas induced by ACEIs, ARB and those of unknown cause. No significant differences were observed in the above findings between the patients who underwent tracheotomy and those who did not. Two patients exhibited low C4 levels, and one of the two exhibited no activity of C1 esterase inhibitor.

CONCLUSION

Consistent with previous reports, angioedema in the floor of the mouth extending to the tongue should be considered as a possible risk factor for airway compromise. Laboratory examinations for acute phase inflammatory markers are not useful for diagnosis and are not predictive for airway intubation and tracheotomy. Angioedema induced by candesartan can present in anomalous sites and reappear following drug cessation even if the edema has resolved completely.