PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12766556

Adverse herbal interactions causing hypotension.

Abstract

A 57-year-old man consulted an herbalist for epigastric discomfort. Four hours after he drank a decoction made from 14 herbs, he developed nausea, epigastric pain, and dizziness. He also had two loose bowel movements. On arrival at the hospital 4 hours later, his blood pressure was 77/46 mm Hg, and his pulse was 60 beats/min. He was given intravenous fluids. In the next 3 hours, his blood pressure gradually returned to his usual level of 100/65 mm Hg. His other gastrointestinal symptoms gradually subsided during the next 24 hours. His white cell count was 17.8 x 109/L but was normal on recheck. Complete cell counts, renal function and liver function tests, and electrocardiogram were otherwise normal. He was discharged home on day 2. Seven of the 14 herbs taken by this patient are known to have vasodilatory or blood pressure-lowering effects, and 3 of these herbs are used to manage hypertension. In traditional Chinese medicine, practitioners often use a combination of herbs in an attempt to improve the efficacy but reduce the adverse effects of treatment. The risk of adverse herbal interactions will also be higher.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Anna L N Wong, Jimmy T S Chan, Thomas Y K Chan. 2003. Adverse herbal interactions causing hypotension.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007691-200306000-00008

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Optimizing adjunctive antithrombotic therapy in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction: a role for low-molecular-weight heparin.

Thrombotic complications account for a large proportion of in-hospital deaths from acute myocardial infarction (MI). Although thrombolytic therapy has greatly improved clinical outcomes following MI, thrombin released during clot lysis has a prothrombotic effect, and the thrombolytic agents themselves may directly activate platelets. Antithrombotic therapy as an adjunct to thrombolysis improves the speed and extent of artery recanalization and reduces the incidence of secondary ischemic complications. The current treatment standard is unfractionated heparin (UFH) administered intravenously for 24-48 h. However, UFH has not been unequivocally shown to improve outcomes in large-scale, randomized clinical trials, and shows no evidence of benefit when used as an adjunct to streptokinase-based thrombolysis. Unfractionated heparin also has several clinical and practical disadvantages, such as the need for coagulation monitoring, difficulties attaining a stable and reliable anticoagulant effect, and the risk of hemorrhagic side effects. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) represents a safe and effective alternative antithrombotic therapy, with a stable and predictable anticoagulant effect, potential for use in combination with either fibrin-specific or streptokinase-based thrombolysis, no need for anticoagulation monitoring, and a low risk of hemorrhagic and other heparin-related complications. Several randomized clinical trials have shown that adjunctive LMWH is at least as effective as UFH in the acute phase of MI, is associated with fewer in-hospital recurrent ischemic events, and has an acceptable safety profile.

Drug Therapy, Combination↗

Tamponade properties of double-filling with perfluorohexyloctane and silicone oil in a model eye chamber.

BACKGROUND: The use of perfluorohexyloctane as a heavier-than-water tamponade for long-term use is limited by its tendency to dispersion and associated intraocular inflammation. Double-filling with silicone oil and F6H8 produces a united, two-layer bubble, appearing as a single bubble. This has been proposed as a method of improving the utility of F6H8 as a tamponade. METHODS: A surface modified polymethylmethacrylate model eye chamber was double-filled with perfluorohexyloctane and silicone oil to approximate a 90% fill. The proportion of silicone oil was increased in a stepwise fashion. A qualitative comparison of surface contact at each stage was made. Chambers with one, two or no indent were used. Dispersion by agitation of the chamber was assessed. RESULTS: With less than 20% silicone oil it was difficult to force the two liquids to make contact. With more oil they united in the form of a single bubble joined at an interface. Once joined, the sides of the single bubble were drawn away from the wall of the chamber. As the proportion of silicone oil increased the area of lost contact increased and progressed inferiorly. Compared to F6H8 alone the double-fill reduced dispersion. CONCLUSION: Silicone oil and F6H8 can unite to form a single bubble that changes the effectiveness of either tamponade agent on their own. The double-fill needs to have enough silicone oil to form a single bubble, but this needs to be kept as low as possible to avoid progressive loss of lateral tamponade. It does not provide good simultaneous superior and inferior tamponade. The double-fill reduces dispersion.

Drug Therapy, Combination↗

The changing clinical presentation of recurrent primary biliary cirrhosis after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent disease after liver transplant is a significant problem. Recurrent primary biliary cirrhosis (RPBC) is a histologic diagnosis. Clinical data is unreliable in predicting or diagnosing recurrence. RPBC appears to have a changing clinical presentation in recent years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The diagnosis of RPBC after liver transplantation was made histologically. Data were obtained from our prospectively maintained liver-transplant database and evaluated statistically. RESULTS: Between 1985 and 1999, 1,835 liver transplants were performed, 169 for PBC. One hundred fifty-six patients were evaluated (one patient received retransplantation, and 13 were excluded). Seventeen (10.9%) experienced recurrence. Median posttransplantation follow-up time was 72.1 months. Median time to recurrence was 49.6 months. Median follow-up time after recurrence was 11.5 months. Neither acute rejection episodes (P=0.34) nor OKT3 use (P=0.36) before diagnosis of recurrence was significant. The combination of cyclosporine, azathioprine, and prednisolone demonstrated recurrence in 6 of 71 (8.4%). Six of 49 (12.2%) patients treated with cyclosporine with or without mycophenolate mofetil and prednisolone experienced recurrence. Six of 36 (16.7%) patients treated with tacrolimus and prednisolone with or without mycophenolate mofetil experienced recurrence. Patients treated with cyclosporine had numerically fewer recurrences than those treated with tacrolimus (P=0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RPBC demonstrated prolonged survival. Clinical factors did not aid in predicting RPBC. The clinical course of RPBC appears to be different than in the earlier years of liver transplantation. Immunosuppression may play a role. The use and type of antimetabolite drugs had no affect on recurrence. RPBC demonstrated a different clinical course with tacrolimus treatment (shorter time to recurrence) and increased incidence when compared with cyclosporine treatment. Controlled randomized studies are necessary to determine differences between tacrolimus and cyclosporine treatment, if any.

Drug Therapy, Combination↗