Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Sarah L Johnston Department of Immunology and Immunogenetics,
Southmead Hospital, Bristol BS10 5NB Correspondence to: S L Johnston sljoh{at}hotmail.com
The true incidence of anaphylaxis is unknown. A study in an
accident and emergency department suggested an incidence of between 1 in 2300 and 1 in 1500 attendances.1 Fatal anaphylaxis is rare but probably underestimated. A register established in 1992, recording fatal reactions, gave an incidence of only 20 cases a year in
the United Kingdom.2 Using adrenaline (epinephrine) in the
context of acute severe anaphylaxis characterised by hypotension or
marked respiratory difficulty is not contentious.3
Adrenaline, however, is not a treatment without
risk2
especially in patients with cardiovascular
comorbidity or who are taking an interacting medication.4
Despite the low incidence of life threatening anaphylaxis, over
100 000 adrenaline syringes have been prescribed throughout the United
Kingdom for community use.5 We report two cases with
serious outcomes as a direct result of adrenaline treatment,
highlighting the dangers of this drug outside the context of acute
severe anaphylaxis.
![]()
Case reports
Case 1
Top
Case reports
Discussion
References
A 64 year old man was referred to our clinic for investigation of a 15 year history of benign idiopathic
angio-oedema, mainly affecting his face and tongue. An EpiPen
(ALK-Abelló, Hungerford, Berkshire) for self administration of
adrenaline had already been prescribed. His medical history included
hypertension and type II diabetes. The hypertension had been treated
with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, but when this
treatment was withdrawn the angio-oedema continued. He had a family
history of ischaemic heart disease. On no occasion had the patient
himself considered the angio-oedema to be life threatening, and
according to his medical notes no respiratory compromise had occurred
during acute episodes. Twice in accident and emergency his symptoms had
been treated with intramuscular adrenaline. On one of these occasions he developed central chest pain, and an electrocardiogram showed ischaemic changes. In clinic his blood pressure was 210/115 mm Hg,
requiring treatment with a calcium antagonist. A trial of regular
antihistamines had a good effect, the EpiPen was withdrawn, and he
remained well on follow up.
A 40 year old woman referred herself to her local hospital with generalised urticaria and facial angio-oedema, which developed within 30 minutes of taking pseudoephedrine and diphenhydramine for acute sinusitis. She had a history of mild asthma
but no cardiac disease. On her arrival at hospital, the angio-oedema
and urticaria were documented, but no life threatening features were
found. Specifically, she had no hypotension or respiratory distress.
She was given 1 ml of 1 in 1000 adrenaline, 10 mg chlorpheniramine, and
100 mg hydrocortisone, all intravenously. She subsequently developed
pulseless ventricular tachycardia (figure). This reverted to sinus
rhythm during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. An electrocardiogram showed signs of ischaemia following cardiac arrest. The patient was
admitted for observation and discharged with an EpiPen. On follow up,
exercise tolerance testing and echocardiography were normal. In view of
the arrhythmia, we were asked for our opinion on the safety of
adrenaline (see discussion). The EpiPen was withdrawn, and the patient,
who has avoided pseudoephedrine and diphenhydramine, has remained
entirely well.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Acute systemic anaphylaxis results from widespread mast cell
degranulation triggered by a specific allergen. Clinically, it is
characterised by laryngeal oedema, bronchospasm, and hypotension. Adrenaline reverses the immediate symptoms of anaphylaxis by its effects on
and
adrenoceptors. It reverses peripheral
vasodilatation, reduces oedema, induces bronchodilatation, has positive
inotropic and chronotropic effects on the myocardium, and suppresses
further mediator release. Using adrenaline as the first line treatment in the management of true systemic anaphylaxis is therefore not disputed, although data from controlled trials are lacking. The United
Kingdom consensus guidelines say that adrenaline may be underused.3 However, the important issue is appropriate
use. Angio-oedema alone, unless affecting the larynx, is not an
indication for use of adrenaline. Current guidelines for the management
of anaphylaxis are shown in the box.
|
Current guidelines for the management of anaphylaxis in
adults
3 4
Adrenaline should be given only if the life threatening features hypotension, bronchospasm, or laryngeal oedema are present.
|
Fatal anaphylaxis is rare.2 Of the 20 recorded fatal cases a year in the United Kingdom, half are iatrogenic, mainly occurring in hospital, a quarter are related to food allergy, and a quarter are related to venom allergy. In a series of deaths studied by Pumphrey, two deaths occurred after adrenaline overdose in the absence of anaphylaxis, three deaths occurred after adrenaline overdose in the context of allergic reactions, and two fatal myocardial infarctions occurred after adrenaline administration for mild iatrogenic reactions (where less aggressive treatment may have been appropriate).2
The cases reported here show the dangers of inappropriate
treatment with adrenaline for mild urticaria or angio-oedema in the
absence of cardiovascular or respiratory features of anaphylaxis. The
patient in case 1, who was known to have arterial disease and
hypertension, developed coronary ischaemia on at least one occasion
when given unnecessary adrenaline for benign idiopathic facial angio-oedema. In the second case, the intramuscular preparation (1 in 1000) was administered intravenously in error, precipitating ventricular tachycardia. Concurrent pseudoephedrine may have been contributory. Intravenous adrenaline should be reserved for extreme emergencies when there is doubt about the adequacy of the circulation. In practice, guidelines advise careful titration of the 1 in 10 000
intravenous preparation only by experienced medical staff, with
adequate cardiac monitoring, in the context of life threatening shock
or anaesthetic anaphylaxis.
3 6
In neither case were there
features of systemic anaphylaxis, and adrenaline was therefore not
indicated. Both patients would have been treated adequately with
antihistamine and steroids.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Contributors: All authors saw the patients and reviewed their histories. SLJ drafted the original manuscript. The final paper was written jointly by all the authors. MMG will act as guarantor.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: None.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Stewart AG, Ewan PW. The incidence, aetiology and management of anaphylaxis presenting to an accident and emergency department. Q J Med 1996; 89: 859-864. |
| 2. | Pumphrey RSH. Lessons for management of anaphylaxis from a study of fatal reactions. Clin Exp Allergy 2000; 30: 1144-1150[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 3. | Project Team of the Resuscitation Council (UK). Emergency medical treatment of anaphylactic reactions. J Accid Emerg Med 1999; 16: 243-247[Medline]. |
| 4. | British Medical Association, Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British national formulary. London: BMA, RPS, 2002:158-160. (No 44.) |
| 5. |
Unsworth DJ.
Adrenaline (epinephrine) syringes in the community a good idea?
Arch Dis Child
2001;
84:
410-411 |
| 6. | Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland and British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. Suspected anaphylactic reactions associated with anaesthesia. 2. Revised edition 1995. www.aagbi.org/pdf/Anaphyld.pdf (accessed 19 Nov 2002). |
(Accepted 21 October 2002)
Read all Rapid Responses