Why the study?
Are serum and myocardial digoxin concentrations elevated in patients experiencing cardiac arrest, and does digitalization affect survival?
Are serum and myocardial digoxin concentrations elevated in patients experiencing cardiac arrest, and does digitalization affect survival?
Patients experiencing cardiac arrest while on digoxin frequently have toxic serum levels, often driven by renal failure and higher doses, and exhibit worse survival compared to non-digitalized patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Digitalized arrest patients often have toxic digoxin levels associated with lower survival; leaves open whether toxicity is causal or confounded by renal failure.
In 22 digitalized (of a total of 39) patients studied at random by radioimmunoassay during cardiac arrest, the mean serum digoxin concentration was 2.6 (+/- 1.86, range 0.6-8.2) ng/ml, significantly higher (P less than 0.001) than the "eudigitalized" concentration (1.3 +/- 0.52, range 0.5-2.3 ng/ml) determined under carefully standardized conditions in a non-toxic population. Half of the arrest patients had serum digoxin levels in the toxic range (2.4 ng/ml or above), mainly due to significant renal failure (mean serum creatinine concentration 2.9 +/- 2.66 v. 1 +/- 0.26 mg/dl for non-toxic subjects, P less than 0.001), partly due to a higher mean daily digoxin dose (0.40 v 0.31 mg/day, P less than 0.05) and frequently associated with potent diuretic therapy (73 v 54%). A smaller fraction of digitalized patients survived, both short- (27%) and long-term (14%), than did non-digitalized subjects (35% and 26%, respectively). The mean myocardial digoxin concentration was 150 (+/- 63.3, range 52-252) ng/g with an average myocardial/serum ratio of 62.5 (range 38-91). There were significant positive correlations between the serum digoxin and left-ventricular myocardial digoxin concentration (r=0.8107, P less than 0.01) or serum creatinine concentration (r=0.4637, P less than 0.001).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schapel et al. (1975) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: