Marik P E, Fromm L
Medical Intensive Care Unit, St. Vincent Hospital, Worcester, Massachusetts 01604, USA.
Am J Med. 1998 Aug;105(2):110-5. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(98)00195-8.
Although there is renewed enthusiasm for the use of digoxin in patients with heart failure, current dosing guidelines are based on a nomogram published in 1974. We studied the incidence of and risk factors for elevated digoxin levels in patients admitted to a community hospital, and compared their dosage regimens to published guidelines.
We reviewed the charts of all patients who had serum digoxin levels greater than 2.4 ng/mL during a 6-month period. We collected demographic and clinical data, indications for digoxin use, digoxin dosage, concurrent medications, laboratory data, and clinical and electrocardiographic features of digoxin toxicity.
Of the 1,433 patients with digoxin assays, 115 (8%) patients had elevated levels. Of the 82 patients with complete records and correctly timed digoxin levels, 59 (72%) had electrocardiographic or clinical features of digoxin toxicity. Patients with serum digoxin levels >2.4 ng/mL were slightly older (78 +/- 8 versus 73 +/- 9 years of age; P = 0.12) and had greater serum creatinine levels (3.1 +/- 7.3 versus 1.4 +/- 0.3 mg/dL; P = 0.01) than those with levels < or =2.4 ng/mL. Forty-seven patients had elevated digoxin levels on admission, including 21 patients admitted for digoxin toxicity. Impaired or worsening renal function contributed to high levels in 37 patients, and a drug interaction was a contributory factor in 10 cases. Twenty (43%) of these patients were taking the recommended maintenance dose based on the scheme employed in the Digitalis Investigation Group study. Thirty-five patients developed high digoxin levels while in hospital. In 26 patients, this followed a loading dose of digoxin for the control of rapid atrial fibrillation. Impaired renal function was implicated in all of these patients. Despite the elevated digoxin level, rate control was achieved in only 11 patients of these patients.
Elevated digoxin levels and clinical toxicity remains a common adverse drug reaction. Elderly patients, particularly those with impaired renal function and low body weights, are at the greatest risk. As published digoxin nomograms often result in toxicity, clinical variables need to be monitored. In patients with congestive heart failure and normal sinus rhythm the potential benefit of digoxin is small; thus, patients should receive a dose that minimizes the risk of toxicity. For patients with new onset atrial fibrillation, other agents may be preferable for rate control.
尽管目前人们对心力衰竭患者使用地高辛的热情再度高涨,但当前的给药指南是基于1974年发表的一张列线图制定的。我们研究了一家社区医院收治患者地高辛水平升高的发生率及危险因素,并将他们的给药方案与已发表的指南进行比较。
我们回顾了6个月期间所有血清地高辛水平大于2.4 ng/mL患者的病历。我们收集了人口统计学和临床数据、使用地高辛的指征、地高辛剂量、同时使用的药物、实验室数据以及地高辛中毒的临床和心电图特征。
在1433例进行了地高辛检测的患者中,115例(8%)患者地高辛水平升高。在82例记录完整且地高辛水平检测时间正确的患者中,59例(72%)有地高辛中毒的心电图或临床特征。血清地高辛水平>2.4 ng/mL的患者比地高辛水平≤2.4 ng/mL的患者年龄稍大(78±8岁对73±9岁;P = 0.12),血清肌酐水平更高(3.1±7.3对1.4±0.3 mg/dL;P = 0.01)。47例患者入院时地高辛水平升高,其中21例因地高辛中毒入院。肾功能受损或恶化导致37例患者地高辛水平升高,10例患者存在药物相互作用是一个促成因素。这些患者中有20例(43%)根据洋地黄研究组研究采用的方案服用推荐的维持剂量。35例患者住院期间地高辛水平升高。其中26例患者是在给予地高辛负荷剂量以控制快速心房颤动后出现这种情况。所有这些患者都存在肾功能受损。尽管地高辛水平升高,但这些患者中只有1例实现了心率控制。
地高辛水平升高和临床中毒仍然是常见的药物不良反应。老年患者,尤其是肾功能受损和体重较轻的患者,风险最大。由于已发表的地高辛列线图常常导致中毒,需要监测临床变量。在充血性心力衰竭和窦性心律正常的患者中,地高辛的潜在益处较小;因此,患者应接受能将中毒风险降至最低的剂量。对于新发心房颤动患者,其他药物可能更适合用于控制心率。