Myocardial infarction during anaphylaxis in a young healthy male with normal coronary arteries- is epinephrine the culprit?

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is an acute, potentially fatal medical emergency. Myocardial injury or infarction in the setting of an anaphylaxis can be due the anaphylaxis itself, when it is known as Kounis syndrome or it can also be due to the effect of epinephrine treatment. Epinephrine is considered as the cornerstone in management of anaphylaxis. Myocardial infarction secondary to therapeutic doses of adrenaline is a rare occurrence and only a few cases have been reported in literature. The mechanism of myocardial injury was considered to be due to coronary vasospasm secondary to epinephrine as the coronary angiograms were normal on these occasions.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 21-year- old previously healthy male got admitted to the local hospital with an urticarial rash and difficulty in breathing, one hour after ingestion of prawns for which he was known to be allergic. He was treated with 0.5 ml of intramuscular adrenaline (1:1000) which was administered to the lateral side of the thigh, following which he developed palpitations and tightening type central chest pain. Electrocardiogram showed ST segment depressions in leads III, aVF and V1 to V5 and he was transferred to a tertiary care hospital. The second electrocardiogram, done 2 h later, showed resolution of ST segment depressions but new T inversions in leads I and aVL. Troponin I was elevated with a titer of 2.15 ng/ml. He was treated with sublingual GTN in the emergency treatment unit and the symptoms resolved. Transthoracic 2D echocardiogram and stress testing with treadmill was normal and CT coronary angiogram revealed normal coronary arteries.

CONCLUSION

Here we present a case of a young healthy adult with no significant risk factors for coronary artery disease who developed myocardial infarction following intramuscular administration of therapeutic dose of adrenalin for an anaphylactic reaction. The postulated mechanism is most likely an alpha receptor mediated coronary vascular spasm. However the use of adrenaline in the setting of life threatening anaphylaxis is life saving and the benefits far outweigh the risks of adverse effects. Therefore the purpose of reporting this case is not to discourage the use of adrenaline in anaphylaxis but to make aware of this potential adverse effect which can occur in the acute setting.