Citations

In the absence of suitable oral or intravenous access for medication administration and when the intramuscular medications are undesirable, alternative routes for drug delivery may be considered. Antipsychotics administered via an inhaled, intranasal, rectal, or topical route have been described in the literature. Topically administered antipsychotics have been previously reported to produce negligible systemic absorption despite being used in clinical practice for nausea and behavioral symptoms associated with dementia. Additionally, the American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine recommends against the use of topical medications that lack supporting literature. Three studies have assessed the systemic absorption of different antipsychotics after administration of only a single, topically applied dose. To evaluate whether the repeated administration of a topically applied antipsychotic may result in detectable serum levels in an accumulating fashion, a pharmacokinetic study was conducted. Five healthy, adult participants consented to receive extemporaneously prepared topical quetiapine in Lipoderm every 4 hours for a total of 5 doses. Blood samples were drawn at baseline and hours 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24, and serum quetiapine concentrations were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. Quetiapine was undetectable in every sample from 3 participants. Two participants had minimally detectable serum quetiapine levels no sooner than hour 12 of the study period. Extemporaneously prepared quetiapine in Lipoderm resulted in nonexistent or minimal serum level following repeated topical administration. The use of topically applied quetiapine should still be questioned.

Long-acting injectable antipsychotics provide the delivery of medication over an extended period of time requiring administration typically only every 2 to 4 weeks. The side effect profile of a long-acting injectable antipsychotic is predictable and similar to the oral formulation. However, injection site reactions may occur with this novel delivery system. The risk of an injection site reaction may be greater with the repeated administration of a lipophilic decanoate formulation and include pain, development of indurations, and fibrosis. Severe complications from injection site reactions have rarely been described in the literature with newer agents. We report the first case of a patient prescribed paliperidone palmitate every 3 weeks that developed severe sepsis requiring vasopressors and intubation due to delayed relayed recognition of a necrotizing infection at an injection site. Clinicians should be alerted to screen for injection site reactions when there is an unknown source infection in a patient receiving a long-acting injectable antipsychotic.

Dexmedetomidine is a highly selectiveα2agonist used as a sedative agent. It also provides anxiolysis and sympatholysis without significant respiratory compromise or delirium. We conducted a systematic review to examine whether sedation of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) with dexmedetomidine was associated with a lower incidence of delirium as compared to other nondexmedetomidine sedation strategies. A search of PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews yielded only three trials from 1966 through April 2015 that met our predefined inclusion criteria and assessed dexmedetomidine and outcomes of delirium as their primary endpoint. The studies varied in regard to population, comparator sedation regimen, delirium outcome measure, and dexmedetomidine dosing. All trials are limited by design issues that limit our ability definitively to conclude that dexmedetomidine prevents delirium. Evidence does suggest that dexmedetomidine may allow for avoidance of deep sedation and use of benzodiazepines, factors both observed to increase the risk for developing delirium. Our assessment of currently published literature highlights the need for ongoing research to better delineate the role of dexmedetomidine for delirium prevention.

Objective: To review the literature evaluating gabapentin for alcohol withdrawal and dependence. Data Sources: A literature search of MEDLINE (1966 to end of March 2015) and PubMed was performed using the terms alcohol, gabapentin, withdrawal, and dependence. Additional references were identified from a review of literature citations. Study Selection and Data Extraction: English-language prospective studies evaluating gabapentin for alcohol withdrawal and dependence were evaluated. Data Synthesis: A total of 10 publications utilizing gabapentin in alcohol withdrawal (n = 5) and alcohol dependence (n = 5) were included in this review. Limited data suggest that gabapentin can provide benefit in managing mild alcohol withdrawal syndrome. There were 5 reported or suspected seizures in the withdrawal studies, suggesting that additional safety data are necessary before gabapentin monotherapy can be routinely considered. Sleep and mood/anxiety-related outcomes were positively influenced by gabapentin, which may result in long-term benefits if continued beyond the withdrawal period for the treatment of alcohol dependence. Studies evaluating gabapentin for alcohol dependence demonstrated dose-dependent benefits for complete abstinence, rates of no heavy drinking, and cravings. Gabapentin used to treat alcohol dependence was well tolerated with no severe adverse reactions reported in the extant literature. Conclusion: Gabapentin may have a role in the treatment of mild alcohol withdrawal, but future studies should focus on adequate dosing strategies. Gabapentin should be considered for the treatment of alcohol dependence when barriers prevent the use of traditional agents. Additional studies should be conducted to further validate findings from the research conducted to date, but the current literature is promising for gabapentin in the treatment of alcohol dependence.

Objective: To describe 3 cases of clozapine toxicity associated with infectious and/or inflammatory processes. Case Summaries: Three patients stable on clozapine therapy prior to a medical hospital admission developed clozapine toxicity. It was suspected that an acute infectious and/or inflammatory process in each patient was related to abrupt mental status changes, onset of sialorrhea, myoclonus, and/or need for ventilatory support. Investigations of altered mental status did not reveal alternative causes and presentations were not consistent with neuroleptic malignant syndrome, other acute neurologic complications, or psychiatric decompensation. All patients improved after clozapine dose reductions allowing for transfer from intensive care units. Using the Naranjo ADR Probability Scale for each case, a probable relation between clozapine toxicity and the infectious and/or inflammatory process was determined. Discussion: Clozapine toxicity may manifest with multiple symptoms, including sedation, sialorrhea, and hypotension. In addition to overdose and drug interactions; infection and/or inflammation may precipitate clozapine toxicity. This may be related to cytokine-mediated inhibition of cytochrome P450 1A2. The likelihood of toxicity via this mechanism has not been well characterized, thus careful monitoring is required for medically ill patients receiving clozapine. Clozapine is extensively bound to the acute phase reactant, α-1 acid glycoprotein, which may unpredictably protect against clinical toxicity. C-reactive protein has also been investigated to relate clozapine toxicity to infection and/or inflammation. Conclusion: Clozapine toxicity developed in 3 patients admitted to a medical setting suspected to be related to infection and/or inflammation. Clinicians should be aware of this potential adverse drug event with clozapine.

BackgroundAlcohol withdrawal accounts for a significant amount of hospital admissions and can quickly progress to the development of delirium tremens (DTs), seizures, and death. Rapid identification and management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is vital and can be managed with a number of different treatment strategies. Diazepam loading is a treatment strategy that utilizes the pharmacokinetics of this agent to achieve a rapid reduction in symptoms followed by sustained benefit over a period of days.ObjectiveThe purpose of this review is to evaluate the role of diazepam loading for AWS.MethodsA literature search of four databases—Pubmed, PsychInfo, Biosis, and Embase—was conducted to identify publications between 1960 and August 2011 that described the use of diazepam loading for the treatment of AWS. Eight trials, both open‐label and controlled trials were identified. Only four randomized controlled‐trials (RCTs) have been published and they are reviewed in this paper.ResultsIncluded trials of hospitalized inpatients found that diazepam loading provided rapid symptom relief as well as reduced the incidence of seizures and duration of DTs. In patients diagnosed with severe DTs, rapidly administered doses of diazepam produced a quick calming effect. While no adverse events resulting from diazepam loading were noted, no formal assessment tool was used to evaluate its safety. Larger randomized controlled‐trials are needed to better evaluate safety outcomes.ConclusionsDiazepam loading is an effective treatment option for hospitalized patients experiencing AWS. Diazepam loading uses the concept of symptom‐triggered therapy, a mainstay of current AWS treatment, while exploiting its prolonged elimination half‐life and eliminating the need for additional pharmacologic therapy. Studies reviewed found diazepam loading significantly improved a number of important outcomes in AWS, including time in DTs, compared to traditional treatment strategies. (Am J Addict 2013;22:113‐118)

OBJECTIVE: To describe a case of torsades de pointes (TdP) in a patient treated with aripiprazole. CASE SUMMARY: A 42-year-old white male with schizophrenia, diabetes, hypertension, and a history of stroke was admitted to the intensive care unit following 2 days of fever, diarrhea, and altered mental status. Following the resolution of his acute illness, previous therapy with quetiapine 400 mg orally at bedtime was resumed for schizophrenia and presumed delirium. Quetiapine was discontinued after 1 dose because of QTc interval prolongation. Twenty-three days later, with a baseline Q Tc interval of 414 milliseconds, aripiprazole 2.5 mg orally once daily was initiated. Following 5 days of aripiprazole therapy, the patient had a cardiac arrest due to TdP. Normal sinus rhythm was restored after 30 seconds of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 1 shock of 200 Joules, and 4 g of intravenous magnesium sulfate. Serial electrocardiographs obtained after aripiprazole discontinuation revealed resolution of QTc interval prolongation. DISCUSSION: Aripiprazole is a second-generation antipsychotic that may be selected for patients with prolonged QTc intervals and at risk for TdP. Data from trials indicate that aripiprazole has minimal effects on the QTc interval. However, in this case, aripiprazole was associated with TdP in a patient with minimal risk factors. The Naranjo probability scale was used to determine a probable association between aripiprazole and the development of TdP. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of TdP associated with the use of aripiprazole. CONCLUSIONS: Five days of low-dose aripiprazole therapy was associated with the development of TdP in a man with minimal risk factors. Clinicians should be aware of this potential adverse drug event with aripiprazole.