Download PDF
CC BY-NC 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2014; 41(05): 571-575
DOI: 10.5999/aps.2014.41.5.571
Original Article

Disulfiram Implantation for the Treatment of Alcoholism: Clinical Experiences from the Plastic Surgeon's Point of View

Billur Sezgin
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Erzurum Regional Training and Research Hospital, Erzurum, Turkey
,
Serhat Sibar
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Gazi University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
,
Hakan Bulam
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Numune Research and Training Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
,
Kemal Findikcioglu
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Gazi University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
,
Serhan Tuncer
Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Gazi University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
,
Bilge Dogan
Department of Psychiatry, Gazi University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Background Disulfiram implantation is a widely used treatment alternative for alcohol abuse, yet reports on the surgical aspect of disulfiram implantation with respect to patient and drug-related treatment efficacy and wound complications are very limited. We present our clinical experiences with disulfiram implantation and discuss the surgical outcomes obtained with different anatomical planes for implantation.

Methods Medical records of all patients referred to our clinic from the psychiatry department between 2007 and 2013 for disulfiram implantation were retrospectively analyzed. Implantation was carried out using 10 sterile Disulfiram tablets (WZF Polfa S.A.), each tablet containing 100 mg of disulfiram. The procedure was carried out by implanting the tablets randomly in either a subcutaneous or an intramuscular plane. The location and the plane of implantation and the complications were recorded for each patient and compared to determine the differences in the outcomes.

Results A total of 32 implantation procedures were evaluated for this study. Twenty-five implants were placed in the intramuscular plane (78.2%), while seven implants were placed subcutaneously (21.8%). Exposure was encountered in three of the seven subcutaneous implants (42.9%), while no exposure was seen with the intramuscular implants. Incomplete absorption of the tablets was encountered in one patient with a previous subcutaneous implant who presented 1 year later for re-implantation as part of the continuation of therapy.

Conclusions To overcome the issue of treatment continuation in the case of disulfiram therapy, which may be ceased due to frequently encountered wound complications, we believe that implantation in the subscapular intramuscular plane allows both uneventful healing and an out-of-reach implant location.

Keywords

Alcoholism - Bioabsorbable implant - Disulfiram

This study was presented at the 35th Congress of the Turkish Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons on October 28-31, 2013, in Istanbul, Turkey.




Publication History

Received: 27 May 2014

Accepted: 12 July 2014

Article published online:
05 May 2022

© 2014. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, permitting unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Williams EE. Effects of alcohol on workers with carbon disulfide. JAMA 1937; 109: 1472-1473
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Hald J, Jacobsen E. A drug sensitizing the organism to ethyl alcohol. Lancet 1948; 2: 1001-1004
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Martensen-Larsen O. Treatment of alcoholism with a sensitizing drug. Lancet 1948; 2: 1004
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Johansson B. A review of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of disulfiram and its metabolites. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl 1992; 369: 15-26
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Allen JP, Litten RZ. Techniques to enhance compliance with disulfiram. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1992; 16: 1035-1041
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kellam AM, Wesolkowski JM. Disulfiram implantation for alcoholism. Lancet 1968; 1: 925-926
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Wilson A, Davidson WJ, White J. Disulfiram implantation: placebo, psychological deterrent, and pharmacological deterrent effects. Br J Psychiatry 1976; 129: 277-280
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Johnsen J, Morland J. Disulfiram implant: a double-blind placebo controlled follow-up on treatment outcome. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1991; 15: 532-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Johnsen J, Stowell A, Bache-Wiig JE. et al. A double-blind placebo controlled study of male alcoholics given a subcutaneous disulfiram implantation. Br J Addict 1987; 82: 607-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Malcolm MT, Madden JS. The use of disulfiram implantation in alcoholism. Br J Psychiatry 1973; 123: 41-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Beasley A, Schutt-Aine A. Contraceptive procedures. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2013; 40: 697-729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cavender RK, Fairall M. Subcutaneous testosterone pellet implant (Testopel) therapy for men with testosterone deficiency syndrome: a single-site retrospective safety analysis. J Sex Med 2009; 6: 3177-3192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar