Delirium secondary to anticholinergics

  1. Annalise Bellizzi 1,
  2. Elyse Mercieca 2 and
  3. Catherine Dimech 1
  1. 1 Department of Psychiatry, Mount Carmel Hospital, Attard, Malta
  2. 2 Mater Dei Hospital, Msida, Malta
  1. Correspondence to Dr Annalise Bellizzi; annalisebellizzi@gmail.com

Publication history

Accepted:28 Dec 2022
First published:10 Jan 2023
Online issue publication:10 Jan 2023

Case reports

Case reports are not necessarily evidence-based in the same way that the other content on BMJ Best Practice is. They should not be relied on to guide clinical practice. Please check the date of publication.

Abstract

We present a case of a young man who developed sudden deterioration in his physical and mental state whilst being treated as an inpatient for substance-induced psychosis. This deterioration was manifested by sudden disorientation, change in behaviour and visual hallucinations. It was only after excluding other potential causes that this presentation was attributed to the regular administration of procyclidine that was being used to counteract the extrapyramidal side effects from antipsychotics. The patient showed a dramatic improvement on stopping procyclidine. This case highlights the importance of awareness of rare adverse drug reactions and the resultant distressing effect for the patient himself.

Background

Antipsychotics are the mainstay of treatment of psychosis. They are well known for their extrapyramidal side effects (EPSEs) that greatly impact a patient’s well-being, including stiffness, tremor, difficulty eating and writing. Procyclidine is commonly prescribed to alleviate EPSEs. It does so by inhibiting the action of acetylcholine at the muscarinic receptor, hence minimising its excitatory effects.1

Reported side effects of procyclidine include most commonly drowsiness, dizziness, constipation, flushing, nausea, nervousness, blurred vision and dry mouth. Rarely, it is reported to cause abdominal pain, difficulty swallowing, urinary retention, weakness, chest pain, fainting, fever, tachycardia, arrhythmias, change in mental state (such as confusion, hallucinations, memory problems), mydriasis and visual changes.1 2

Being an anticholinergic, anticholinergic delirium is a possible, although rare, adverse effect of procyclidine. Following the use of Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale,3 this case report illustrates a probable procyclidine-induced delirium in a young adult man.

Case presentation

A man in his early 30s was initially referred from the health clinic to the Accident & Emergency Department (A&E)accompanied by the police in view of bizarre behaviour, agitation and paranoia towards other people. On mental state examination, the patient was noted to have symptoms of thought insertion, broadcast and withdrawal. Elements of persecutory delusions were also noted, and these resulted in aggressive and agitated behaviour that required rapid tranquilisation.

This was the patient’s first presentation with psychosis. Physical examination at A&E was unremarkable and an organic screen was carried out including blood tests and a CT brain. Results obtained from this organic screen were all within normal limits. A drug urine analysis was also done, and it came positive for synthetic cannabinoids. In keeping with these findings, the working diagnosis at this point was substance-induced psychosis.

Eventually, the patient was transferred to a psychiatric hospital where he was started on regular intramuscular haloperidol and lorazepam to help with agitation, as initially he was refusing oral treatment. The patient’s psychiatric state improved gradually, and he eventually started cooperating with the administration of oral antipsychotics and benzodiazepines. Eventually, risperidone was also added to aid with the persistent delusions and paranoia. After weeks of adjusting treatment dosages, the patient showed a significant improvement in his mental state. However, 8 weeks into the admission, he started to report about generalised stiffness and jaw-locking on chewing. This was treated as a side effect from the antipsychotics and he was thus started on regular procyclidine at 5 mg two times per day.

Within 3 days of commencement of regular procyclidine, the nursing staff started to notice subtle changes in the patient’s behaviour. Initially, episodes of staring and mumbling were noted. His bizarre behaviour became progressively worse with increasing episodes of talking to himself and with speech becoming progressively slurred, up to a point that it was almost incomprehensible. He started to experience disorientation, paranoid delusions and visual hallucinations. He was noted to be responding to these external stimuli by feeding cats and dogs, which were not actually present. He became increasingly hostile, agitated and uncooperative with the staff in fact, he required transfer to a secure and closed ward.

Physical examination showed increased tone in all four limbs as well as dilated pupils. However, he remained afebrile and haemodynamically stable. An organic screen, which included urgent blood investigations, a 12-lead ECG, urinalysis for bacteria and for drug screen were all performed. All results were within normal limits.

This presentation (disorientation, visual hallucinations, behavioural change) was consistent with that of delirium, however, the cause was unclear. While reviewing the patient’s file, it was noted that there was a correlation between the introduction of regular administration procyclidine and the deterioration in the patient’s state.

Procyclidine was stopped and immediate improvement in the patient’s mental state was noted. Within 2 days of discontinuing procyclidine, the patient’s mental state returned to normal; he was oriented to time, place and person, and he stopped experiencing visual hallucinations and paranoia.

Investigations

On the patient’s initial presentation at the Emergency department, an organic screen was carried out. This included a 12-lead ECG, baseline blood tests (complete blood count, renal profile, C reactive protein, serum electrolytes, thyroid function tests, liver function tests, lipid profile, coagulation screen), urinalysis and CT brain. Urine was also tested for drugs of abuse and sent for a toxicology screen.

An organic screen was repeated once again when the patient presented in a delirious state to exclude underlying organic pathology causing or contributing to the delirium.

Outcome and follow-up

The patient remained an inpatient for a number of months after this episode mainly due to social issues that had to be settled prior to discharge. The patient was seen regularly during ward rounds and remained well after stopping the regular administration of procyclidine. After 3 months, he was discharged to the community with frequent outpatient follow-up appointments (every 2 weeks) and also involved the outreach community mental health team to ensure regular reviews of his mental state and adherence to treatment.

Discussion

This case study describes an example of probable procyclidine-induced delirium.

As an anticholinergic, procyclidine exerts its effect through its action on muscarinic receptors. M1 receptors are responsible for perception, cognition and attention. Antagonism of post synaptic M1 receptors can present as delirium (with agitation and confusion), as in the case of this male.4 Specific signs also include pressured, incomprehensible speech and visual±auditory hallucinations; both of which were present in the here-mentioned case. Research shows that ‘picking at objects’ is a common presentation, and in this case, the patient was noted to be ‘feeding animals’ in his room—what likely was a visual perceptual abnormality.4 Administration of procyclidine or any other anticholinergic medication can hence potentially cause anticholinergic delirium, as a result of central antimuscarinic inhibition.

Risk scales are commonly used in both research and clinical practice to help to quantify the anticholinergic burden associated with a drug based on its anticholinergic activity (low, moderate or high). A recent systematic review has highlighted that procyclidine is considered to have a high anticholinergic activity, hence supporting our likely diagnosis of procyclidine-induced delirium.5

Cases of delirium secondary to anticholinergic drugs have been reported; however, these are much commoner in the elderly population.4 6 This may be due to the increased sensitivity of muscarinic receptors in the elderly, decreased clearance of drugs as well as polypharmacy which may increase drug-to-drug interactions hence maximising the anticholinergic effects.7

Coexisting peripheral antagonism can also occur at peripheral muscarinic receptors (M2, M3 and M4). In our case, this man had an increased tone and dilated pupils on examination; signs which are commonly present in peripheral anticholinergic inhibition.7

The metabolism of oral procyclidine also needs to be taken into consideration. Approximately one-fifth of the dose of procyclidine is hepatically metabolised mainly by cytochrome P450 and then undergoes conjugation with glucuronic acid.8 Action of cytochrome P450 enzymes can vary from one individual to another and hence it cannot be ruled out that pharmacogenetics could have played a part in serum procyclidine concentration.9 Even though the half-life of procyclidine on average is 12 hours,8 slower metabolism due to patient pharmacogenetics could have potentially caused a build-up of serum procyclidine concentrations, leading to a central anticholinergic syndrome.9 Another possible influencing factor might be the fact that procyclidine metabolism can potentially be inhibited by a coprescribed antipsychotic, resulting in increased procyclidine plasma concentration which can further potentiate its antimuscarinic effects.10

Substance-induced psychosis was a potential differential diagnosis in this case, nonetheless the repeated negative toxicology samples made this unlikely.

Synthetic cannabinoid withdrawals also produce a picture similar to that of delirium, with irritability and agitation having been mentioned as two of the most common symptoms.11 12 However, these usually peak at day 2 postcessation of cannabinoid use. In this case, the deterioration in mental state occurred more than 8 weeks into admission, making it unlikely to be due to synthetic cannabinoid withdrawals.12 13

On assessing drug-to-drug interactions between medications that the patient was taking (haloperidol, risperidone, lorazepam, procyclidine), no significant interaction was identified that gave a plausible explanation for the delirium.14 The frequency of anticholinergic adverse effects with risperidone is documented as being negligible or absent.5 15

Procyclidine and haloperidol are commonly prescribed together, as procyclidine helps diminish the EPSEs of haloperidol. When it comes to drug-to-drug interactions between procyclidine and haloperidol, the only significant remark was that serum levels of haloperidol may decrease on administration of procyclidine.12 14 With this in mind, it is important to note that an increase in dose of haloperidol was ineffective and that the clinical picture was more congruent with that of delirium, rather than psychosis. It is also worth mentioning that haloperidol in itself has a low central anticholinergic effect.16 17 However, the resolution of symptoms despite continuance of haloperidol renders this factor improbable to be the cause of the delirium.

This patient’s delirium was adequately managed by the cessation of administration of the causative medication (procyclidine), the administration of benzodiazepines and non-pharmacological measures. Management of anticholinergic delirium depends on severity. Non-pharmacological measures include a low stimulus environment and frequent orientation to the patient7 while benzodiazepines also have a role in the management of mild to moderate agitation.18 19 It is also very important to exclude other underlying factors, which could potentially exacerbate the delirium. These factors, such as anticholinergic burden (due to polypharmacy) or underlying organic disorders, increase with age and comorbidity.7

Following the Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale,3 a score of 6 was calculated for a drug reaction to procyclidine. Scale is shown as figure 1.

Figure 1

Adverse drug reaction probability scale applied to this case. Adapted from Naranjo et al 3.

Patient’s perspective

I was very afraid when it started to happen. I was sure of the cats and dogs lying around me. I tried to feed them. I started to feel very drowsy and confused, wasn’t sure if I knew the other people. I did realise that this happened after starting one particular medication. In fact, I don’t ever want to take the same medication again.

Learning points

  • This case highlights the importance of awareness of rare adverse drug reactions and the resultant distressing effect for the patient himself.

  • This case study emphasises the importance of patient monitoring and of titration of doses on initiating anticholinergics including procyclidine.

  • This case exemplifies how the Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale could be a useful tool to assess the likelihood of an adverse drug reaction.

  • Being an anticholinergic, anticholinergic delirium is a possible, although rare, adverse effect of procyclidine.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication

Footnotes

  • Contributors AB, EM and CD have been directly involved in the patient’s care and care plan. AB, EM and CD have been involved in: Conception and design, acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation of dataDrafting the article and editing it as necessary. Approved the final versionAgreed to be accountable for the article and to ensure that all questions regarding the accuracy or integrity of the article are investigated and resolved.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

References

Use of this content is subject to our disclaimer