| Literature DB >> 35891595 |
Yuichiro Haba1, Hikaru Akizuki2, Naoyuki Hashiguchi2, Toshio Naito1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cefmetazole (CMZ), containing an N-methyl-tetrazole-thiol (NMTT) side chain, is a therapeutic option for diverticulitis in Japan. Cephems containing an NMTT, a methyl-thiadiazol, and a thiadiazolethiol side chain are known to induce coagulation disorders. CASE REPORT A 76-year-old woman developed hypoprothrombinemia after receiving oral levofloxacin (LVFX) 250 mg q24h for 2 days followed by intravenous CMZ 2 g q8h for sigmoid diverticulitis. On day 5 of CMZ administration (after 12 doses in total), black stool was observed. On the following day (after 14 doses), prothrombin time (PT) prolongation was noted; PT and international normalized ratio (INR) were 37.1 s and 2.47, respectively. We diagnosed the patient with hypoprothrombinemia because of vitamin K deficiency caused by markedly elevated protein levels induced by vitamin K absence or antagonist-II on day 6 of CMZ administration. Intravenous vitamin K administration and CMZ cessation rapidly restored PT and led to the disappearance of black stool. CONCLUSIONS The causes of vitamin K deficiency were considered to be an impaired vitamin K cycle due to CMZ and decreased vitamin K intake because of malnutrition. These findings are consistent with CMZ's reported adverse effects. Decreased vitamin K production due to alterations in the gut bacterial flora by LVFX and CMZ was also postulated as a cause. If a bleeding tendency is noted during diverticulitis treatment with NMTT-containing cephems, switching to intravenous quinolones or carbapenems is recommended. It remains unclear how this reaction can be avoided; however, prudent monitoring of bleeding signs and PT-INR is recommended.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35891595 PMCID: PMC9340825 DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.936712
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Case Rep ISSN: 1941-5923
Laboratory findings on the first visit, on admission, and on the 6th hospital day.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WBC (/μL) | 12 700 | 18 800 | 6200 | 3600–8900 |
| Hb (g/dL) | 11.6 | 11.4 | 11.5 | 11.1–15.2 |
| PLT×104 (/μL) | 28.0 | 13.1 | 37.4 | 15.3–34.6 |
| T-Bil (mg/dL) | 0.48 | 0.71 | 0.28 | 0.40–1.20 |
| AST (U/L) | 17 | 17 | 18 | 5–37 |
| ALT (U/L) | 14 | 15 | 15 | 6–43 |
| ALP (U/L) | – | 143 | 130 | 110–348 |
| γ-GT (U/L) | 10 | 10 | 11 | 0–75 |
| LD (U/L) | 219 | 161 | 173 | 119–221 |
| UN (mg/dL) | 20 | 16 | 12 | 9–21 |
| Cr (mg/dL) | 0.90 | 0.96 | 0.70 | 0.50–0.80 |
| Ccr (mL/min) | 52.5 | 49.2 | 66.0 | |
| CRP (mg/dL) | 0.61 | 15.17 | 1.16 | 0–0.29 |
| APTT (s) | – | 31.3 | 38.5 | 20.0–38.0 |
| PT (s) | – | 13.0 | 37.1 | 13.8 |
| PT-INR | – | 0.95 | 2.46 | 0.90–1.10 |
Ccr – creatinine clearance
Summary of the previous reported cases of CMZ-induced hypoprothrombinemia on MEDLINE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1984 | JPN | 86 | F | Pneumonia | >45 [NA] |
| 1984 | JPN | 70 | F | Sepsis | 22.9 [NA] |
| 1984 | JPN | 81 | F | Urinary tract infection, bronchitis | 36.9 [NA] |
| 1984 | JPN | 71 | F | Prophylaxis for blood access construction surgery | >45 [ |
| 1984 | JPN | 72 | F | NA | 87.1 [ |
| 1989 | US | 57 | M | Appendicitis and appendectomy | 17 [ |
| 1997 | US | 63 | M | Prophylaxis for leg amputation | 91.2 [11.5] |
| 2017 | JPN | 93 | F | Urinary tract infection | NA |
| 2019 | JPN | 84 | M | Urinary tract infection | NA |
| 2020 | JPN | 70 | M | Prophylaxis for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery | NA |
| 2022 | JPN | 76 | F | Diverticulitis | 37.1 [13.8] |
CMZ – cefmetazole; JPN – Japan; US – United States; PT – prothrombin time; INR – international normalized ratio; NA – not available.
Naranjo scale of adverse drug reaction probability. Underlining is applied for our study.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Are there previous conclusive reports of this reaction? |
| 0 | 0 | |
| 2. Did the adverse event appear after the drug was given? |
| −1 | 0 | |
| 3. Did the adverse reaction improve when the drug was discontinued or a specific antagonist was given? |
| 0 | 0 | |
| 4. Did the adverse reaction reappear upon readministering the drug? |
| −1 |
| |
| 5. Were there other possible causes for the reaction? | −1 |
| 0 | |
| 6. Did the adverse reaction reappear upon administration of placebo? | −1 | +1 |
| |
| 7. Was the drug detected in the blood or other fluids in toxic concentrations? | +1 | 0 |
| |
| 8. Was the reaction worsened upon increasing the dose? Or, was the reaction lessened upon decreasing the dose? | +1 | 0 |
| |
| 9. Did the patient have a similar reaction to the drug or a related agent in the past? | +1 |
| 0 | |
| 10. Was the adverse event confirmed by any other objective evidence? |
| 0 | 0 | |
| Total score in our study | 7 | |||
| ≥9: definite adverse drug reaction | ||||