Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Sep;11(3):377-388.
doi: 10.1007/s40801-024-00435-0. Epub 2024 Jun 5.

Characterizing Utilization and Outcomes of Digoxin Immune Fab for Digoxin Toxicity

Affiliations

Characterizing Utilization and Outcomes of Digoxin Immune Fab for Digoxin Toxicity

Sophia Sheikh et al. Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2024 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Digoxin is a widely prescribed drug for congestive heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Digoxin has a narrow therapeutic index and toxicity can develop quite easily. Digoxin immune fab (DIF) is an effective treatment for toxicity, however there are limited studies characterizing its impact on clinical outcomes in real-world clinical practice.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify factors and healthcare outcomes associated with digoxin immune fab (DIF) treatment in patients with confirmed/suspected digoxin toxicity.

Methods: An IRB-approved retrospective chart review of digoxin toxic patients (2011-2020) presenting at an academic healthcare system was conducted. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Patients were stratified by DIF treatment versus non-DIF treatment. DIF utilization patterns (appropriate, use when not indicated, or underutilized) were determined using pre-defined criteria. Severe digoxin toxicity was defined as having one or more of the following: mental status disturbances, antiarrhythmic therapy, acute renal impairment or dehydration, serum digoxin concentration (SDC) > 4 ng/mL, or serum K+ > 5 mEq/mL. Logistic multivariable regression analysis evaluated factors associated with DIF use. All statistical analyses were performed in R version 4.1.

Results: Data from 96 patients (non-DIF treated group = 49; DIF treated group = 47) were analyzed. DIF was used appropriately in 70 patients (73%), underutilized in 19 (20%), and administered to 7 (7%) patients when it was not indicated. Several clinical parameters differentiated the DIF from the non-DIF group (p < 0.05) including higher mean SDC (3.41 ± 1.63 vs 2.87 ± 1.17), higher mean potassium (5.33 ± 1.48 vs 4.55 ± 0.87), more toxicity severity (85% vs 49%), and more likely to require cardiac pacing (26% vs 4%). Digoxin toxicity resolved sooner in the DIF group (coefficient - 0.702, 95% CI - 1.137 to - 0.267) (p < 0.01) and they had shorter intensive care unit lengths of stay (12.4 ± 20.3 vs 24.4 ± 28.7 days; p = 0.018). The all-cause mortality rate in patients appropriately managed with DIF therapy versus those patients where DIF was underutilized was 11% and 21%, respectively.

Conclusions: Based on our study population, DIF therapy appears to be beneficial in limiting duration of toxicity and intensive care unit lengths of stay in digoxin toxic patients. Although DIF was appropriately utilized in most cases, there was a relatively high proportion of cases in which DIF treatment was either underutilized or not indicated.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dr Sophia Sheikh has no conflicts to report. Ms Munson has no conflicts to report. Mr Garvan has no conflicts to report. Ms Layton has no conflicts to report. Dr Sollee has no conflicts to report. Dr Cowdery has no conflicts to report. Dr Peterson has no conflicts to report. Dr Schaack Rothstein has no conflicts to report. Ms Henson has no conflicts to report. Dr Gartner has no conflicts to report. Dr Michael Ujhelyi is a paid consultant of BTG International.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Inclusion schematic of patient encounters identified by the IDR. *Encounters associated with serum digoxin concentrations performed as outpatient laboratory testing, documented in outpatient clinic visits or telephone calls. ^Encounters not related to digoxin (examples include mismatch between physician-selected diagnostic code [such as adverse effect of other antidysrhythmic drugs, initial encounter] and final billed diagnostic code [adverse effect of cardiac-stimulant glycosides and drugs of similar action, initial encounter]). DIF digoxin immune fab, EHR electronic health record, IDR University of Florida Integrated Data Repository
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Temporal trends in digoxin toxicity and digoxin immune fab antibody administrations (2011–2020)

References

    1. Lavonas EJ, Akpunonu PD, Arens AM, et al. 2023 American Heart Association Focused Update on the Management of Patients With Cardiac Arrest or Life-Threatening Toxicity Due to Poisoning: An Update to the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care. Circulation. 2023. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001161. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001161 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Eisen A, Ruff CT, Braunwald E, et al. Digoxin use and subsequent clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation with or without heart failure in the ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48 Trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(7): e006035. 10.1161/JAHA.117.006035. 10.1161/JAHA.117.006035 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rich MW, McSherry F, Williford WO, Yusuf S, Digitalis Investigation Group. Effect of age on mortality, hospitalizations and response to digoxin in patients with heart failure: the DIG study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38(3):806–13. 10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01442-5. 10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01442-5 - DOI - PubMed
    1. See I, Shehab N, Kegler SR, Laskar SR, Budnitz DS. Emergency department visits and hospitalizations for digoxin toxicity. Circ Heart Fail. 2014;7(1):28–34. 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.113.000784. 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.113.000784 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Charfi R, Ben Sassi M, Gaies E, Jebabli N, Daghfous R, Trabelsi S. Digoxin therapeutic drug monitoring: age influence and adverse events. Tunis Med. 2020;98(1):35–40. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources