Anaphylactic risk associated with iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media

Sainan Bian,Zixi Wang,Lisha Li,Le Cui,Yingyang Xu,Kai Guan,Bin Zhao,Huadan Xue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14740338.2024.2435431

2024-12-01

Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Abstract:Background This study aimed to analyze the risk signals of iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media associated with anaphylaxis.

pharmacology & pharmacy

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Adverse Reactions to Contrast Material: A Canadian Update

Alexander Morzycki,Anuj Bhatia,Kieran J. Murphy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carj.2016.05.006

2017-05-01

Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal

Abstract:Imaging techniques frequently employ contrast agents to improve image resolution and enhance pathology detection. These gadolinium- and iodine-based media, although generally considered safe, are associated with a number of adverse effects ranging from mild to severe. Reactions are classified as either anaphylactoid (“anaphylaxis-like”) or nonanaphylactoid, depending on a number of elements that will be reviewed. Herein, we have summarized predisposing risk factors for adverse events resulting from the use of contrast, their associated pathophysiological mechanisms as well as known prophylaxis for the antitreatment of high-risk patients. In the unlikely event that a serious adverse reaction does occur, we have provided a comprehensive summary of treatment protocols. Our goal was to thoroughly evaluate the current literature regarding adverse reactions to radiocontrast agents and provide an up to date review for the health care provider.
[Complications related to the administration of iodinated contrast media]

O Cappeliez,M Lemort,J Dagnelie

Abstract:Improvement brought to iodinated molecules aims to obtain an optimal enhancement effect together with a lower toxicity. However, benign adverse events remain a common risk, and anaphylactoid reactions from the intravascular administration of iodinated contrast media may occur at random and are unpredictable. Although most contrast reactions are mild and self-limited, severe and even life-threatening reactions can occur at any time and for any kind of agent. Physicians must be aware of possible complications related to administration of this kind of agents and must be able to identify patients at risk, to care for prevention and prescribe an appropriate premedication regimen.
Shelling the myth: allergies to Iodine containing substances and risk of reaction to Iodinated contrast media

Richard Bruen,Aaron Stirling,M Ryan,M Sheehan,Peter MacMahon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-021-01989-0

Abstract:Purpose: In excess of 100 million procedures using iodinated radio-contrast media are conducted each year. There is a common misunderstanding regarding the links between allergy to iodinated substances and the risk of allergic reaction to intravenous iodinated contrast agents. These perceived risks are managed via administration of corticosteroids or avoidance of iodinated contrast altogether. Methods: An extensive review of published literature on scientific databases and international guidelines was conducted in order to inform the research question. A questionnaire was formulated and distributed to hospital doctors in four tertiary centres. Within this questionnaire, hospital doctors were presented with six different scenarios of bona fide allergy to iodinated substances (e.g. shellfish) and asked to select the treatment response option which they deemed to be the most suitable from a choice of three (standard contrast scan/delay scan with pre-medication/change to non-contrast scan). Results: Eighty-seven questionnaire responses were received. Contrast (standard protocol) was the most appropriate regimen in the setting of all the listed allergies. This was identified correctly by 76%, 69%, 44%, 32%, 18% and 14% for kiwi, fish, poly-food, shellfish, betadine and tincture of iodine allergies, respectively. Conclusions: There is a lack of understanding amongst local junior medical staff regarding administration of iodinated contrast media to patients with a history of allergy to iodinated substances. These misconceptions may potentiate the unnecessary usage of pre-medication and ordering of non-contrast scans in the setting of a gold-standard enhanced scan. Findings from this study suggest that there is a need for future education efforts targeted during the basic specialty training stage.
Iodine and Gadolinium Contrast Reactions: What Is the Risk and Role of Premedication, Abbreviated Protocols, Prior History of Reactions, and Cross-Reactivity?

Benjamin M Mervak,Jennifer S McDonald

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2024.02.014

Abstract:Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media and gadolinium-based contrast media can be life-threatening. While corticosteroid premedication or agent-switching may mitigate risk, evidence is largely indirect and based on historical studies; recent literature refutes the efficacy. Guidance on premedication varies between organizations worldwide. No strategy eliminates reactions, and indirect consequences of premedication are substantial. Accelerated regimens are often used for emergencies, but are of questionable efficacy. Identifying "high-risk" patients is complex, but a history of reactions (to the same contrast class) is the biggest risk factor.
Safety of non-ionic contrast media in CT examinations for out-patients: retrospective multicenter analysis of 473,482 patients

Wen Zeng,Jing Tang,Xu Xu,Yu Zhang,Lingming Zeng,Yiteng Zhang,Zejun Liang,Chunchao Xia,Lihong Zhao,Zhenlin Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10654-2

IF: 7.034

2024-03-09

European Radiology

Abstract:This study aimed to explore the incidence of and potential risk factors for adverse drug reactions (ADRs) after non-ionic iodinated contrast media (NICM) administration for CT exams in out-patient settings in China.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Retrospective analysis of non-laboratory-based adverse drug reactions induced by intravenous radiocontrast agents in a Joint Commission International-accredited academic medical center hospital in China

Qin-Lan Chen,Xiao-Ying Zhao,Xiao-Mi Wang,Na Lv,Ling-Ling Zhu,Hui-Min Xu,Quan Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S134265

2017-04-26

Abstract:The authors retrospectively analyzed the pattern and characteristics of non-laboratory-based adverse drug reactions (ADRs) induced by intravenous radiocontrast agents in a large-scale hospital in China during 2014-2015. There were 314 ADR cases among 118,208 patients receiving enhanced CT or MRI examinations. The frequency of moderate/severe ADRs defined by Chinese Society of Radiology (ie, severe vomiting, systematic urticaria, facial swelling, dyspnea, vasovagal reaction, laryngeal edema, seizure, trembling, convulsions, unconsciousness, shock, death, and other unexpected adverse reactions) was rare (0.0431%), whereas the mild ADRs were uncommon (0.2225%) and accounted for 83.76% of ADRs. Frequency of ADRs induced by iodinated contrast agents was related with examination site, sex, and type of patient settings (P<0.01) and was higher compared with gadolinium contrast agents (0.3676% vs 0.0504%, P<0.01). From 2014 to 2015, frequencies of total and moderate/severe ADRs induced by iodinated contrast agents decreased significantly (0.4410% vs 0.2947%, P<0.01; 0.0960% vs 0.0282%, P<0.01, respectively). Frequency of ADRs differed among different iodinated contrast and gadolinium contrast (P<0.05) agents. Iopromide's ADR frequency in 2014 was significantly higher compared with iopamidol, ioversol, or iohexol (P<0.01). Frequency of moderate/severe ADRs induced by iodixanol was 4.1-5.4 times that of iohexol, iopromide, or iopamidol. Rash was the predominant ADR subtype (84.39%) and occurred more frequently with iodixanol compared with iohexol, iopamidol, or ioversol (P<0.01). Overall, 21.97% of ADR cases had allergy history or atopy traits, and these cases experienced ADRs earlier than the negative ones (17.19 min vs 85.34 min, P<0.01). The mean time to onset of ADRs was increased in patients receiving iodixanol compared with other iodinated contrast agents (323.77 min vs 42.36 min, P<0.01). Overall, 37.26% of ADRs occurred within 5 min and 84.08% of ADRs occurred within 30 min. Efficient quality improvement in decreasing ADRs induced by radiocontrast agents has been achieved by multidisciplinary collaboration.
[Contrast medium: an unpredictable ally]

Ioanna Chrysogelou,David Michely,Elodie Zürcher,Magali-NoËlle Pfeil

DOI: https://doi.org/10.53738/REVMED.2024.20.883.1400

2024-08-21

Abstract:Reactions to contrast media are unpredictable. This article examines the use of iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast agents in medical imaging. It explores their clinical presentation, associated risk factors, precautions prior to their administration, and treatment options in the event of a reaction. By highlighting these essential aspects, the article aims to inform healthcare professionals on the safe and effective management of these agents during imaging procedures. The effectiveness of the different premedication protocols proposed in the literature has not yet been established. In particular, premedication does not prevent serious allergic reactions.
Zero-iodinated contrast retrograde percutaneous coronary interventions of chronic total occlusions using gadolinium and imaging guidance: a case report of a patient with severe anaphylaxis to iodinated contrast

Ankur Gupta,Saroj Neupane,Mir Basir,Khaldoon Alaswad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcr/ytaa092

2020-05-03

Abstract:Background: Gadolinium-based contrast agents have been used as an alternative to iodinated contrast agents for simple percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Their use has been limited in complex PCI due to poor image quality with gadolinium contrast. Significant dilution of gadolinium is required in an effort to avoid malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Further, the recommended amount of gadolinium contrast that can be used is very limited. Case summary: We describe a case of patient with severe anaphylaxis to iodinated contrast agents despite pre-exposure prophylaxis with steroids and histamine blockers who underwent intravascular imaging-guided PCI of chronic total occlusions (CTOs) of left anterior descending and dominant left circumflex arteries using gadolinium contrast. Discussion: In patients with anaphylaxis to iodinated contrast agents (i) complex coronary interventions including CTO PCI can be successfully performed without use of iodinated contrast, and (ii) combination of intravascular ultrasound guidance and gadolinium-based contrast agents can be safely and effectively used to perform complex PCI.
Prevention and Management of Adverse Reactions Induced by Iodinated Contrast Media

Yi-Wei Wu,Kheng Song Leow,Yujin Zhu,Cher Heng Tan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.v45n4p157

2016-04-15

Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore

Abstract:Iodinated radiocontrast media (IRCM) is widely used in current clinical practice. Although IRCM is generally safe, serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) may still occur. IRCM-induced ADRs may be subdivided into chemotoxic and hypersensitivity reactions. Several factors have been shown to be associated with an increased risk of ADRs, including previous contrast media reactions, history of asthma and allergic disease, etc. Contrast media with lower osmolality is generally recommended for at-risk patients to prevent ADRs. Current premedication prophylaxis in at-risk patients may reduce the risk of ADRs. However, there is still a lack of consensus on the prophylactic role of premedication. Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is another component of IRCM-related ADRs. Hydration remains the mainstay of CIN prophylaxis in at-risk patients. Despite several preventive measures, ADRs may still occur. Treatment strategies for potential contrast reactions are also summarised in this article. This article summarises the pathophysiology, epidemiology and risk factors of ADRs with emphasis on prevention and treatment strategies. This will allow readers to understand the rationale behind appropriate patient preparation for diagnostic imaging involving IRCM. Key words: Contrast-induced nephropathy, Hypersensitivity, Premedication

medicine, general & internal
BET 2: Is there an association between iodine, shellfish and contrast agent allergies?

Benjamin Long,Todd Chassee,Jeffrey S Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-209162.3

2019-10-22

Emergency Medicine Journal

Abstract:A shortcut review was carried out to establish whether having a shellfish or iodine allergy changed the risk of allergic reaction in patients receiving radiocontrast medium more than other concomitant allergies. One relevant paper (a systematic review) was identified for inclusion using the reported search strategy. The author, date and country of publication; group studied; study type; relevant outcomes; results and study weaknesses of this paper are tabulated. It is concluded that there is no evidence that allergy to shellfish or iodine alters the risk of reaction to intravenous contrast more than any other allergies.

emergency medicine
Adverse reactions to radiological contrast media: Prevention and treatment

F Vega

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rxeng.2024.03.012

Abstract:Radiological contrast media, both iodinated and gadolinium-based, can lead to adverse reactions. Type A reactions are related to the pharmacological characteristics of the contrast, including side, secondary and toxic effects. Post-contrast acute kidney injury is the most frequent adverse reaction to iodinated contrast media. Less frequently, thyroid, neurological, cardiovascular, haematological, and salivary gland effects are also detected. With gadolinium-based contrast agents, nausea is the most frequent reaction, but there is also a risk of producing nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and cerebral deposits of uncertain significance. The most effective way of avoiding type A reactions is to decrease the dose and frequency of contrast media administration, especially in patients with pre-existing renal insufficiency. To prevent post-contrast acute kidney injury, adequate hydration of the patient should be maintained orally or intravenously, avoiding prolonged periods of liquid fasting. On the other hand, hypersensitivity reactions are dose-independent and clinically can range from mild cutaneous reactions to anaphylaxis. This article proposes an algorithm that differentiates between nonspecific reactions and true hypersensitivity reactions, as well as levels of severity. It also provides a treatment scheme for immediate reactions adjusted to the severity level, with a focus on the management of anaphylaxis and an early intramuscular administration of adrenaline. Finally, it sets out recommendations for the management of patients with previous hypersensitivity reactions who require elective or urgent contrast administration, favouring the use of alternative contrast media with confirmed tolerance instead of the indiscriminate use of premedication.
Genome-wide association study of hypersensitivity skin reactions induced by nonionic iodinated contrast media

Min-Rou Lin,Ting-Yuan Liu,Hsing-Yu Hsu,Yow-Wen Hsieh,Poppy Diah Palupi,Wan-Hsuan Chou,Pei-Pei Lau,Wei-Chiao Chang,Fuu-Jen Tsai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12932/AP-300424-1850

2024-09-22

Abstract:Background: In Taiwan, nonionic iodinated contrast media (ICMs) are commonly used but can occasionally cause severe side effects. The infrequency of these adverse events, coupled with the complexities in establishing direct causality, poses significant challenges for genetic research. Objective: : To investigate the genetic factors associated with skin reactions mediated by nonionic ICMs on a genome-wide scale. Methods: A hospital-based cohort from the China Medical University Hospital biobank was utilized to conduct a comprehensive genome-wide association study (GWAS) using PLINK v1.9. The study incorporated two distinct cohorts: one based on adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports, capturing immediate reactions, and the other based on self-reports, which primarily reflected delayed reactions. Known loci were determined by the GWAS catalog. Fine mapping was conducted by FINEMAP to predict causal variants. Pathway enrichment analysis was performed by clusterProfiler to reveal the biological function of the identified genetic signatures. Results: The ADR-based cohort included 120 cases and 3640 controls. GWAS identified 6 candidate risk loci, namely rs150515068, rs6847491, rs192044153, rs191908641, rs376660317, and rs368821335. The self-report-based cohort, consisting of 275 cases and 8338 controls, revealed 36 additional candidate risk loci. Fine mapping further identified 4 causal variants within each cohort. Pathway analysis showed that immediate HSR-related genes are linked to growth hormone response and signaling, while non-immediate HSR genes are involved in neurotransmission. Conclusion: This study offers new perspectives on the genetic foundation of nonionic ICM-induced skin reactions within the Taiwanese population, suggesting that the genes contributing to immediate and non-immediate HSRs might have different functional roles.
Managing Adverse Reactions to Contrast Agents

Brian Boyd,Carlos A. Zamora,Mauricio Castillo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2017.06.008

IF: 1.376

2017-11-01

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

Abstract:Adverse reactions to iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast agents occur at an incidence of less than 1%. Although the exact pathophysiologic mechanisms are not completely understood, the treatment regimens are well accepted. Skin testing may be helpful in patients with a history of severe allergiclike reaction to aid in the selection of alternative contrast agents. Premedication should only be used for a history of allergiclike reaction. Imaging team members should be familiar with signs and symptoms of contrast reactions to allow for prompt assessment and treatment. A plan of action should be in place for contrast reactions and rehearsed regularly.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Epidemiology and Triggers of Severe Perioperative Anaphylaxis: An 8-Year Single-Center Study

Lifang Zhou,Cuihua Chen,Qiuying Chen,Yage Jiang,Yanhua Chen,Yubo Xie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2024.06.023

Abstract:Objective: To determine the features, rescue measures, outcomes, re-allergic reactions, and independent risk factors associated with severe anaphylaxis during surgery. Design: Instances of severe perioperative anaphylaxis were identified through perioperative electronic records, adverse event reporting records, and surveys of anesthesiologists. Confirmed cases were randomly matched 4:1 with control cases on the same operation day. Patient risk factors, surgery type, anesthetic technique, and perioperative medications, fluids, and blood transfusions were given in instances of severe perioperative anaphylaxis were compared with control cases. Setting: A tertiary hospital in China. Patients: All patients undergoing surgery and anesthesia in the operating room from January 2014 to February 2022. Measurements: Incidence and the independent risk factors for severe perioperative anaphylaxis. Main results: Ninety-seven patients experienced severe perioperative allergic responses during the 266,033 surgeries performed, with an incidence rate of 3.6 per 10,000. Three of 97 anaphylaxis patients experienced a severe allergic reaction again during the second surgery. The nested case-control study revealed that the independent triggers during surgery were allergy history (odds ratio 5.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.35-11.68; p < 0.001), cisatracurium use (odds ratio 5.03; 95% CI, 1.22-20.70; p < 0.001), hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 use (odds ratio 5.36; 95% CI, 2.99-9.60; p =0.025), and allogeneic plasma (odds ratio 11.02; 95% CI, 3.78-35.95; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Perioperative severe anaphylaxis is a rare but life-threatening complication. Previous allergic history, cisatracurium, hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4, and allogeneic plasma may be the independent triggers. Early diagnosis of anaphylaxis and the timely administration of epinephrine are critical to allergic treatment. Avoiding exposure to allergens is effective for preventing severe allergic responses and the efficacy of glucocorticoids and antihistamines is controversial.
Trends in Adverse Events After IV Administration of Contrast Media

Sachiko T. Cochran,Karen Bomyea,James W. Sayre

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.176.6.1761385

2001-06-01

American Journal of Roentgenology

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: Data collected from 1985 to 1999 on adverse events after the IV administration of contrast media were evaluated to identify trends.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data collected on 391 adverse events after 90,473 administrations of iodinated contrast media and 19 events after 28,340 administrations of gadolinium were evaluated. Reactions were graded as mild, moderate, or severe. Data were also collected regarding contrast extravasation.RESULTS: When only ionic iodinated contrast material was used, the adverse reaction rate was 6-8%. With the selective use of contrast material, the adverse reaction rate was 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively, for ionic and nonionic agents. The rate decreased to 0.2% with the universal use of nonionic agents. More than 90% of adverse reactions were allergic-like. Seven severe reactions (0.05%) and no deaths occurred in the ionic group. During the selective use period, one death occurred in the nonionic group. No severe reactions or deaths occurred during the first 5 years of universal nonionic use. Since then, 10 severe reactions (0.02%) and one death have occurred. Seven reactions occurred in patients after helical CT angiography. The extravasation rate for iodinated contrast material has remained constant at 0.3-0.4% annually. The adverse reaction rate to gadolinium contrast material was 0.06%.CONCLUSION: Mild and moderate adverse events are more common with ionic contrast material than with nonionic. Most reactions are allergic-like. Severe reactions are seen equally with ionic and nonionic contrast material but differ in type. The reactions were allergic-like in the ionic group but were predominantly attributable to cardiopulmonary decompensation in the nonionic group. Helical CT angiography may play a role in reactions.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Differences in hypersensitivity reactions and gadolinium deposition disease/symptoms associated with gadolinium exposure to gadolinium-based contrast agents: new insights based on global databases VigiBase, FAERS, and IQVIA-MIDAS

Han Qu,Wenjing Li,Zhenghua Wu,Yuanyuan Wang,Tingting Feng,Nianyun Li,Chendong Qi,Xiang Li,Taishan Wei,Guorong Fan,Yuefen Lou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03537-2

2024-08-13

Abstract:Background: Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) can occur unexpectedly and be life-threatening when gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) are used. Gadolinium deposition disease (GDD) and symptoms associated with gadolinium exposure (SAGE) have been controversial for a long time. However, similar studies are currently incomplete or outdated. Therefore, comparing the safety of different GBCAs in terms of HSRs and GDD/SAGE using the latest post-marketing safety data should yield further insights into safely using GBCAs. Methods: The safety differences between all GBCAs to GDD and the spectrum of GBCA-related HSRs were all compared and analyzed by using the World Health Organization database VigiBase and the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database in this study. A further analysis of SAGE was also conducted using FAERS data. The lower limit of the reporting odds ratio (ROR) 95% confidence interval was used for signal detection. Moreover, the frequency of HSRs was calculated by dividing the number of reports in VigiBase by the total sales volume (measured in millions) from 2008 to 2022 in the IQVIA Multinational Integrated Data Analysis System. All adverse events were standardized using the Medical Dictionary for Drug Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) 26.0. Results: This study shows that all GBCAs have the potential to induce HSRs, with nonionic linear GBCAs exhibiting a comparatively lower signal. According to standardized MedDRA query stratification analysis, gadobutrol had a greater ROR025 for angioedema. The ROR025 of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadoteridol is larger for anaphylactic/anaphylactoid shock conditions. Regarding severe cutaneous adverse reactions, only gadoversetamide and gadodiamide showed signals in FAERS and VigiBase. There were also differences in the frequency of HSRs between regions. Regarding GDD, gadoterate meglumine, and gadoteridol had a lower ROR025. An analysis of the 29 preferred terms linked to SAGE indicated that special consideration should be given to the risk of skin induration associated with gadoversetamide, gadopentetate dimeglumine, gadobenate dimeglumine, gadodiamide, and gadoteridol. Additionally, gadodiamide and gadoteridol pose a greater risk of skin tightness compared to other GBCAs. Conclusions: The risk differences among GBCAs using data from several sources were compared in this study. However, as a hypothesis-generating method, a clear causal relationship would require further research and validation.
[Prophylaxis and treatment of side effects due to iodinated contrast media relevant to radiological practice]

C Becker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-007-1550-4

Abstract:Increased utilization of iodinated contrast media may be associated with increased incidence of adverse events. The most important side effects include contrast-induced nephropathy, anaphylactoid reaction, thyrotoxicosis, and extravasation. In patients with moderate renal dysfunction, saline hydration and reduction of contrast media volume are recommended. No regime to prevent anaphylactoid reactions has yet proven to be efficient. If subclinical hyperthyroidism has been determined, prophylaxis with sodium perchlorate is advised. Contrast-induced nephropathy is commonly transient and needs to be followed over time. Mild general anaphylactoid reactions may be treated with antihistaminic drugs and corticosteroids. Furthermore the choice of the X-ray contrast media might influence the risk of any adverse effects.
Adverse reactions to gadolinium contrast media: a review of 36 cases.

K J Murphy,J A Brunberg,R H Cohan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.167.4.8819369

1996-10-01

American Journal of Roentgenology

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: We investigated the frequency, manifestations, and severity of reactions to gadolinium contrast media in patients who underwent MR imaging at a single institution.MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the quality assurance records of 21,000 patients to whom gadolinium contrast media were administered at our institution between January 1990 and October 1994. Of these patients, 36 had adverse reactions. All 36 patients were evaluated by a radiologist at the time of the adverse reaction, and a written report of the findings was completed immediately.RESULTS: We classified adverse reactions into four groups: mild nonallergic reactions (15 patients with nausea or vomiting), mild reactions resembling allergy (12 patients with hives, diffuse erythema, or skin irritation), moderate reactions resembling allergy (seven patients with respiratory symptoms), and life-threatening reactions resembling allergy (two patients with severe chest tightness, respiratory distress, and periorbital edema). Eleven of these 36 patients who had adverse reactions also had an unusual local reaction of skin discomfort in the extremity through which gadolinium was injected. Four of the 36 patients with adverse reactions had histories of adverse reactions to iodinated contrast media. All four of these patients and one of the remaining 32 patients with adverse reactions required treatment. No patients with adverse reactions died.CONCLUSION: Although gadolinium contrast media are safe, we found that patients had adverse reactions at a frequency greater than we expected. Severe anaphylactoid reactions occurred in two patients (0.01%). This rate exceeds the rate of 0.0003% reported in the literature. The indexes of suspicion for the occurrence of reactions to gadolinium, and both the documentation and the management of adverse reactions, must be as rigorous for reactions associated with MR imaging contrast agents as they are for reactions associated with iodinated contrast media.

radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging
Safe Use of Contrast Media: What the Radiologist Needs to Know

Katrina R Beckett,Andrew K Moriarity,Jessica M Langer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2015150033

Radiographics

Abstract:Iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media are used on a daily basis in most radiology practices. These agents often are essential to providing accurate diagnoses, and are nearly always safe and effective when administered correctly. However, reactions to contrast media do occur and can be life threatening. Therefore, it is critical for faculty and staff to know how reactions to contrast agents manifest and how to treat them promptly. The decline in renal function seen occasionally after intravenous administration of iodinated contrast agents is poorly understood and likely multifactorial, and its association with the contrast medium may be overemphasized. However, it is important that radiologists be aware of current understanding and strategies to decrease the incidence of renal dysfunction. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, a skin disease, is an adverse reaction related to use of some gadolinium-based contrast agents in patients with chronic renal failure. The types of gadolinium most often associated with this condition and the indications for withholding gadolinium are important and are discussed in this article. The use of enteric contrast agents and contrast agents during pregnancy and nursing are reviewed briefly. Current knowledge for safe use of contrast media and key concepts that all radiologists should know are summarized in this review.
Management of acute coronary syndromes requiring coronary angiography in patients with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms syndrome induced by iodinated contrast media: two case reports and narrative review

Carola Griffith Brookles,Matteo Bianco,Stefano Pizzimenti,Giulia Gobello,Carloalberto Biolè,Paola Destefanis,Enrico Cerrato,Alessandra Chinaglia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcr/ytae259

2024-05-21

Abstract:Background: Hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. Severe manifestations, despite being infrequent, can be life-threatening and represent an issue when re-administration of ICM is required. Clear recommendations on prevention and management of relapses are still lacking. Case summary: We present the cases of two patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome requiring urgent coronary angiography, with an anamnesis of ICM-induced drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms syndrome. Both patients safely underwent a coronary angiography with the use of a different ICM (iobitridol) to the one linked to hypersensitivity manifestations, after premedication with corticosteroids and H1 antagonists. Discussion: Our experience highlights that in clinical situations in which the use of ICM is urgently needed, premedication with corticosteroids and H1 antagonists together with the choice of an alternative contrast agent (when the culprit is known) represents an effective strategy to perform a potentially life-saving procedure while avoiding serious systemic allergic reactions.

Anaphylactic risk associated with iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media

Adverse Reactions to Contrast Material: A Canadian Update

[Complications related to the administration of iodinated contrast media]

Shelling the myth: allergies to Iodine containing substances and risk of reaction to Iodinated contrast media

Iodine and Gadolinium Contrast Reactions: What Is the Risk and Role of Premedication, Abbreviated Protocols, Prior History of Reactions, and Cross-Reactivity?

Safety of non-ionic contrast media in CT examinations for out-patients: retrospective multicenter analysis of 473,482 patients

Retrospective analysis of non-laboratory-based adverse drug reactions induced by intravenous radiocontrast agents in a Joint Commission International-accredited academic medical center hospital in China

[Contrast medium: an unpredictable ally]

Zero-iodinated contrast retrograde percutaneous coronary interventions of chronic total occlusions using gadolinium and imaging guidance: a case report of a patient with severe anaphylaxis to iodinated contrast

Prevention and Management of Adverse Reactions Induced by Iodinated Contrast Media

BET 2: Is there an association between iodine, shellfish and contrast agent allergies?

Adverse reactions to radiological contrast media: Prevention and treatment

Genome-wide association study of hypersensitivity skin reactions induced by nonionic iodinated contrast media

Managing Adverse Reactions to Contrast Agents

Epidemiology and Triggers of Severe Perioperative Anaphylaxis: An 8-Year Single-Center Study

Trends in Adverse Events After IV Administration of Contrast Media

Differences in hypersensitivity reactions and gadolinium deposition disease/symptoms associated with gadolinium exposure to gadolinium-based contrast agents: new insights based on global databases VigiBase, FAERS, and IQVIA-MIDAS

[Prophylaxis and treatment of side effects due to iodinated contrast media relevant to radiological practice]

Adverse reactions to gadolinium contrast media: a review of 36 cases.

Safe Use of Contrast Media: What the Radiologist Needs to Know

Management of acute coronary syndromes requiring coronary angiography in patients with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms syndrome induced by iodinated contrast media: two case reports and narrative review