Ethyl Glucuronide, Ethyl Sulfate, and Ethanol in Urine after Intensive Exposure to High Ethanol Content Mouthwash

Department of Psychiatry, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL 32606, USA.
Journal of analytical toxicology (Impact Factor: 2.86). 06/2011; 35(5):264-8. DOI: 10.1093/anatox/35.5.264
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the degree of ethanol absorption and the resultant formation and urinary excretion of its conjugated metabolites following intensive use of high ethanol content mouthwash, 10 subjects gargled with Listerine(®) antiseptic 4 times daily for 3¼ days. First morning void urine specimens were collected on each of the four study days and post-gargle specimens were collected at 2, 4, and 6 h after the final gargle of the study. Urine ethanol, ethyl glucuronide (EtG), ethyl sulfate (EtS), and creatinine were measured. Ethanol was below the positive threshold of 20 mg/dL in all of the urine specimens. EtG was undetectable in all pre-study urine specimens, but two pre-study specimens had detectable EtS (6 and 82 ng/mL; 16 and 83 μg/g creatinine). Only one specimen contained detectable EtG (173 ng/mL; 117 μg/g creatinine). EtS was detected in the urine of seven study subjects, but was not detected in the single specimen that had detectable EtG. The maximum EtS concentrations were 104 ng/mL and 112 μg/g creatinine (in different subjects). Three subjects produced a total of eight (non-baseline) urinary EtS concentrations above 50 ng/mL or 50 μg/g creatinine and three EtS concentrations exceeding 100 ng/mL or 100 μg/g creatinine. In patients being monitored for ethanol use by urinary EtG and EtS concentrations, currently accepted EtG and EtS cutoffs of 500 ng/mL are adequate to distinguish between ethanol consumption and four times daily use of high ethanol content mouthwash.

287 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study assessed the inhaled dose of alcohol during hand disinfection. Experiments were conducted with two types of hand rub using two hand disinfection procedures. Air samples were collected every 10 s from the breathing zone, by bubbling through a mixture of K(2)Cr(2)O(7) and H(2)SO(4). The reduction of dichromate ions in the presence of alcohols was followed by UV-vis spectrophotometry. The difference in intensity of the dichromate absorption peak was used to quantify the alcohol concentration expressed in ethanol equivalent. During hygienic hand disinfection, the mean ethanol equivalent concentrations peaked at around 20-30 s for both hand rubs (14.3 ± 1.4 mg/L for hand rub 1 and 13.2 ± 0.7 mg/L for hand rub 2). During surgical hand disinfection, two peaks were found at the same time (40 and 80 s) for both hand rubs. The highest mean concentrations were 20.2 ± 0.9 mg/L for hand rub 1 and 18.1 ± 0.9 mg/L for hand rub 2. For hand rub 1, the total absorbed doses, calculated from ethanol with an inhalation flow of 24 L/min and an absorption rate of 62%, were 46.5 mg after one hygienic hand disinfection and 203.9 mg after one surgical hand disinfection. Although the use of ABHRs leads to the absorption of very low doses, sudden, repeated inhalation of high alcohol concentrations raises the question of possible adverse health effects.
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 03/2012; 9(3):868-79. DOI:10.3390/ijerph9030868 · 2.06 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT:   Traditionally, urine drug screens have only been concerned with positive or negative results. Those results provide physicians treating patients for pain with chronic opioid therapy with information about medication compliance, use of nonprescribed medications, and use of illicit drugs. However, the analysis of urine for drugs offers additional information that, when compiled and accurately interpreted, may also be of great value to these doctors. The aim of this article was to discuss the interpretation of urine drug tests and their application to pain physician practices. We utilized a selection of recent articles on urine drug screening applicable to the pain patient population. The article provides pertinent information about interpretation of urine drug testing, which is separated into six categories: which drugs and metabolites to test for; which analytical cutoffs to use; pain medication metabolism; identification of alcohol use; determination of patient compliance; and which patient groups to consider for more frequent testing.
    Pain Medicine 04/2012; 13(7):868-85. DOI:10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01350.x · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ethyl glucuronide (EtG) and ethyl sulfate (EtS) are commonly used alcohol markers for previous alcohol consumption. Nevertheless, the optimum EtG cutoff for urinary abstinence tests is still being discussed, and no cutoff has been recommended for EtS yet. The aim of this study was to verify cutoffs by investigating EtG and EtS concentrations (cEtG and cEtS) in the urine of healthy persons after drinking small, but realistic amounts of alcohol (one or two glasses of beer or white wine), and to look for the window of detection in strongly alcohol-intoxicated patients who were beginning withdrawal treatment. Very high EtG and EtS concentrations were measured in the first urine samples of patients under withdrawal treatment. However, 24 h later, concentrations decreased considerably, and cEtG<0.5 mg/ l and cEtS<0.1 mg/l were determined in 26.7 % (4/13) and 13.3%(2/13) of the samples, respectively. Concentrations above 0.1 mg/l (EtG) and 0.05 mg/l (EtS) were measured for 23.5 and 20.5 h after consuming 0.1 l of white wine or 0.33 l of beer, and 24 h after the experiment, 75%(9/12) of the urine samples were tested negative for EtG and EtS using the following cutoffs: EtG 0.5 mg/l and EtS 0.1 mg/l. In half of the samples, concentrations below 0.1 mg/l (EtG) and 0.05 mg/l (EtS) were detected. Urinary cutoffs for EtG of 0.5 mg/l or higher are not suitable for testing abstinence. Even 0.1 mg/l is not effective to detect the intake of small amounts of alcohol in the context of abstinence tests. For EtS, 0.05 mg/l were found to be a potential cutoff to exclude the repeated intake of alcohol. Yet, further research is required to verify this cutoff. For a limited time period, EtG and EtS concentrations within the range of these cutoffs are also detectable after unintentional consumption of alcohol. Participants of abstinence programs have to be informed about the alcohol content of certain foods and beverages whose consumption is in conflict with strict abstinence.
    Deutsche Zeitschrift für die Gesamte Gerichtliche Medizin 06/2012; 126(5):757-64. DOI:10.1007/s00414-012-0725-3 · 2.71 Impact Factor
Show more