RadioGraphics
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


DOI: 10.1148/rg.24si045519
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bettmann, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bettmann, M. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Health Policy
Right arrow Other
Right arrow Vascular and/or Interventional Radiology
Right arrow Genitourinary Radiology
RadioGraphics 2004;24:S3-S10
© RSNA, 2004


CURRENT PRACTICE ISSUES

Frequently Asked Questions: Iodinated Contrast Agents1

Michael A. Bettmann, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, New York Methodist Hospital, Brooklyn, NY. Received June 3, 2004; revision requested June 23 and received July 23; accepted July 26. The author has received grant support from GE Healthcare Group and Guerbet, and has been a consultant for Bracco Diagnostics and Berlex Imaging. Address correspondence to the author, 453 Sixth St, Brooklyn, NY 11215 (e-mail: mab9099@nyp.org).

Although iodinated contrast agents are safe and widely used, adverse events occur and questions remain about their use, safety, and interactions. Some questions are easily answered and others still require extensive investigation. For one frequent question—is informed consent necessary before all contrast media injections—the simple answer is no. Another question concerns use of contrast media in patients with prior reactions or allergies. Contrast agents can be safely used in such patients, but special care must be taken to be aware of what the previous reaction was and to be ready to treat any reaction. The protective role of pre-treatment with steroids is well established for minor reactions, but they may not prevent major reactions. It is important to realize that even life-threatening, anaphylactoid reactions are not the result of a true allergy to contrast media. Many questions arise about contrast agent–induced nephropathy. Baseline serum creatinine values should be obtained in patients who are at risk, not all patients. The incidence and natural history of contrast agent–induced nephropathy remain unclear. It occurs only in patients with compromised renal function before contrast agent injection, but even patients with normal serum creatinine levels can have renal dysfunction. Calculated creatinine clearance is a better way to determine risk and to follow this complication. The outcome in almost all patients is benign, with progression to end-stage renal disease being rare. The major risk factors, in addition to renal dysfunction, are long-standing diabetes mellitus, dehydration, and use of other nephrotoxic medications. Recent work in preventing and ameliorating contrast agent–induced nephropathy with N-acetyl cysteine, substitution of an isosmolal nonionic contrast agent, and various hydration regimens has been promising. Another common concern is use of iodinated contrast agents in pregnant or breast-feeding women. In both cases, there is no evidence of harm to the fetus or infant, but it is prudent to weigh the theoretical risks and benefits and avoid contrast agent administration unless it is truly necessary.

© RSNA, 2004

Index Terms: Contrast media • Radiology and radiologists, socioeconomic issues







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOGRAPHICS RADIOLOGY RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2004 by the Radiological Society of North America.