Disturbances of gastrointestinal function are common events that can be attributed to the ingestion of a wide range of drug classes.
Gastrointestinal
ADRs
Disturbances
of gastrointestinal function are common events that can be attributed to the
ingestion of a wide range of drug classes. In the 1970s, it was reported that
some 20%–40% of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in hospital monitoring were
gastrointestinal in origin (Hurwitz and Wade, 1969). More recent estimates of
the incidence of ADRs in hospitalised patients (Bates, Leape and Petrycki,
1993; Bowman, Carlstedt and Black, 1994; Lazarou, Pomeranz and Corey, 1998;
Bates et al., 1995a,b) or of subjects
admitted to hospi-tal due to an ADR (Col, Fanale and Kronholm, 1990; Einarson,
1993; Nelson and Talbert, 1996; Lazarou, Pomeranz and Corey, 1998; Roughead et al., 1998; Pouyanne et al., 2000) provide only limited
informa-tion specifically about gastrointestinal events.
A
study in over 4000 hospitalised patients in the United States found 247 ADRs
among 207 admissions (Bates et al.,
1997). The examination of each by organ system affected showed that 18% of
events were of gastrointestinal origin, predominantly nausea, vomit-ing and antibiotic-associated
diarrhoea. An almost identical rate was reported in an observational study of
1024 patients in an internal medicine ward in the United States (Bowman,
Carlstedt and Black, 1994). The gastrointestinal system was the organ system
affected in 17.8% of drug-related adverse events.
The
findings from a prospective study in France showed that gastrointestinal events
were the most frequent cause for admission to hospital for an ADR (Pouyanne et al., 2000). Of 100 admissions, 27
were gastrointestinal, including 13 cases of gastrointesti-nal haemorrhage
caused by anticoagulant drugs and 9 caused by the ingestion of non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).
The
extent of drug-related hospital admissions in Australia was reviewed from
Australian studies published between 1988 and 1996 (Roughead et al., 1998). Fourteen studies were
included in the analy-sis although the diagnosis associated with the
drug-related admissions was available from only five reports. Among the
conditions commonly identified was gastrointestinal bleeding, which usually was
asso-ciated with either warfarin or NSAID therapy.
Many
drugs causing gastrointestinal disorders have been recognised (Bateman and
Aziz, 1998).
Well-established
unwanted effects of drugs include changes in gastrointestinal motility, altered
gastric emptying, disturbances of nutrient absorption, antimicrobial-associated
colitis and pseudomembra-nous colitis. Furthermore, drug-induced lesions are
documented for all sections of the gastrointesti-nal tract. These encompass a
wide range of pathophysiological processes including inflammation, the
formation of strictures, haemorrhage, ulceration and perforation. Others
consist of symptoms such as nausea and vomiting (Quigley, Hasler and Parkman,
2001), diarrhoea (Fine and Schiller, 1999) or consti-pation (Locke, Pemberton
and Phillips, 2000) in the absence of underlying pathology.
The
medical literature on gastrointestinal ADRs is dominated by reports concerning
the NSAIDs. Effects have been documented over many years, but it has been
during the 1990s that the risk factors for upper gastrointestinal problems have
been systematically examined. Over the same period, the small and large bowel
toxicities of the NSAIDs have also become clearly identified.
In
this chapter, we summarise some of the impor-tant literature and reviews from
the 1990s concerning the adverse effects of NSAIDs on the gastrointesti-nal
tract. We also review the medical literature of the 1990s to identify adverse
gastrointestinal effects with other medications detected using a variety of
pharma-covigilance techniques.
The
oesophagus, despite its physiological defence mechanisms, is prone to injury
induced by a wide variety of agents. Medication-induced oesophageal injury or
‘pill oesophagitis’ was first described in the 1970s (Pemberton, 1970). In most
cases, direct oesophageal toxicity is the cause, and the condition is generally
fully reversible on the withdrawal of treatment (Doman and Ginsberg, 1981;
Kikendall, 1999a). Pill oesophagitis is often underdiagnosed; in many
instances, it is incorrectly believed to be gastro-oesophageal reflux disease
(Doman and Ginsberg, 1981; Bonavina et al.,
1987). Almost 1000 reports in the medical literature of pill oesophagitis
attributable to about 100 different medications have been exten-sively reviewed
(Kikendall, 1999a,b). Drugs most frequently implicated in pill oesophagitis
(reports of ≥10 cases) include
antibiotics (doxycycline, tetra-cycline hydrochloride and other unspecified
tetra-cyclines, oxytetracycline, pivmecillinam), potassium chloride,
alendronate, ferrous sulphate and ferrous succinate, quinidine, naproxen,
aspirin, emepronium bromide, pinaverium bromide and alprenolol (Bott, Prakash
and McCallum, 1987; Baehr and McDonald, 1998; Kikendall, 1999a,b; Graham,
2000).
In
the upper gastrointestinal tract, NSAIDs are causally associated with peptic
ulceration along with associated complications such as bleeding and
perfo-ration. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs also cause upper
gastrointestinal haemorrhage as may the selective serotonin re-uptake
inhibitors. Studies in volunteers have shown that alendronate, one of the
bisphosphonate class of drugs, may cause acute gastric mucosal damage and
gastric ulceration.
Non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs can also cause a low-grade enteropathy in the small
intestine. Additionally, in both small and large intestine, they have been
associated with the formation of strictures, bleeding and perforation.
Recently,
an association between a rotavirus vaccine and intussusception in children has
been reported, and fibrosing colonopathy has been linked with the use of
pancreatin supplements in children and adults with cystic fibrosis. The
possibility that measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccination may be a causal factor
in the development of inflamma-tory bowel disease is currently a matter of some
controversy.
Numerous
drugs have been reported to have caused obstruction of the gastrointestinal
tract (Iredale, 1993). Acute colonic pseudo-obstruction is characterised by
massive colonic dilation with a clinical and radiolog-ical appearance of
mechanical obstruction but in the absence of primary colonic pathology.
Although the underlying pathogenetic mechanisms are unknown, it is commonly
associated with surgery, trauma, metabolic imbalance, neurological disease and
seri-ous systemic illness. Anecdotal case reports in the 1980s and 1990s have
associated various drugs with colonic pseudo-obstruction including cloni-dine
(Maganini and Pollitt, 1983; Stieger, Cantieni and Frutiger, 1997), imipramine
(Sood and Kumar, 1996), amitriptyline (McMahon, 1989), amitriptyline with
concomitant lithium (Fava and Galizia, 1995), nimodipine (Fahy, 1996),
tocolytic therapy compris-ing intravenous magnesium and nifedipine (Pecha and
Danilewitz, 1996), interleukin-2 (Post, Falk and Bukowski, 1991), diltiazem
(Mantzoros, Prabhu and Sowers, 1994; Fauville et al., 1995), morphine (Murthy, Ion and Winstanley, 1998),
fludarabine (Campbell et al., 2000),
and enteral activated charcoal alone (Brubacher, Levine and Hoffman, 1996) and
together with sorbitol and papaveretum (Longdon and Henderson, 1992) when given
for the management of theophylline overdose.
Related Topics
TH 2019 - 2024 pharmacy180.com; Developed by Therithal info.