Spectrum of digoxin-induced ocular toxicity: a case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Digoxin intoxication results in predominantly digestive, cardiac and neurological symptoms. This case is outstanding in that the intoxication occurred in a nonagenarian and induced severe, extensively documented visual symptoms as well as dysphagia and proprioceptive illusions. Moreover, it went undiagnosed for a whole month despite close medical follow-up, illustrating the difficulty in recognizing drug-induced effects in a polymorbid patient. CASE PRESENTATION: Digoxin 0.25 mg qd for atrial fibrillation was prescribed to a 91-year-old woman with an estimated creatinine clearance of 18 ml/min. Over the following 2-3 weeks she developed nausea, vomiting and dysphagia, snowy and blurry vision, photopsia, dyschromatopsia, aggravated pre-existing formed visual hallucinations and proprioceptive illusions. She saw her family doctor twice and visited the eye clinic once until, 1 month after starting digoxin, she was admitted to the emergency room. Intoxication was confirmed by a serum digoxin level of 5.7 ng/ml (reference range 0.8-2 ng/ml). After stopping digoxin, general symptoms resolved in a few days, but visual complaints persisted. Examination by the ophthalmologist revealed decreased visual acuity in both eyes, 4/10 in the right eye (OD) and 5/10 in the left eye (OS), decreased color vision as demonstrated by a score of 1/13 in both eyes (OU) on Ishihara pseudoisochromatic plates, OS cataract, and dry age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). Computerized static perimetry showed non-specific diffuse alterations suggestive of either bilateral retinopathy or optic neuropathy. Full-field electroretinography (ERG) disclosed moderate diffuse rod and cone dysfunction and multifocal ERG revealed central loss of function OU. Visual symptoms progressively improved over the next 2 months, but multifocal ERG did not. The patient was finally discharged home after a 5 week hospital stay. CONCLUSION: This case is a reminder of a complication of digoxin treatment to be considered by any treating physician. If digoxin is prescribed in a vulnerable patient, close monitoring is mandatory. In general, when facing a new health problem in a polymorbid patient, it is crucial to elicit a complete history, with all recent drug changes and detailed complaints, and to include a drug adverse reaction in the differential diagnosis.

Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in outpatients with clinical assessment, D-dimer measurement, venous ultrasound, and helical computed tomography: a multicenter management study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a diagnostic strategy for pulmonary embolism that combined clinical assessment, plasma D-dimer measurement, lower limb venous ultrasonography, and helical computed tomography (CT). METHODS: A cohort of 965 consecutive patients presenting to the emergency departments of three general and teaching hospitals with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism underwent sequential noninvasive testing. Clinical probability was assessed by a prediction rule combined with implicit judgment. All patients were followed for 3 months. RESULTS: A normal D-dimer level (<500 microg/L by a rapid enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) ruled out venous thromboembolism in 280 patients (29%), and finding a deep vein thrombosis by ultrasonography established the diagnosis in 92 patients (9.5%). Helical CT was required in only 593 patients (61%) and showed pulmonary embolism in 124 patients (12.8%). Pulmonary embolism was considered ruled out in the 450 patients (46.6%) with a negative ultrasound and CT scan and a low-to-intermediate clinical probability. The 8 patients with a negative ultrasound and CT scan despite a high clinical probability proceeded to pulmonary angiography (positive: 2; negative: 6). Helical CT was inconclusive in 11 patients (pulmonary embolism: 4; no pulmonary embolism: 7). The overall prevalence of pulmonary embolism was 23%. Patients classified as not having pulmonary embolism were not anticoagulated during follow-up and had a 3-month thromboembolic risk of 1.0% (95% confidence interval: 0.5% to 2.1%). CONCLUSION: A noninvasive diagnostic strategy combining clinical assessment, D-dimer measurement, ultrasonography, and helical CT yielded a diagnosis in 99% of outpatients suspected of pulmonary embolism, and appeared to be safe, provided that CT was combined with ultrasonography to rule out the disease.