Ionic versus nonionic contrast media: A prospective study of the effect of rapid bolus injection on nausea and anaphylactoid reactions

被引:27
作者
Federle, MP
Willis, LL
Swanson, DP
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[2] Wilson Mem Hosp, Wilson, NC USA
关键词
contrast media; anaphylaxis; bolus; computed tomography;
D O I
10.1097/00004728-199805000-00001
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effect of bolus infusion of contrast medium (ionic versus nonionic) on the incidence of nausea and anaphylactoid reactions. Method: We prospectively studied 1,827 patients who had bolus enhanced body CT scans and divided them into four groups: 725 patients received higher osmolality contrast medium (HOCM) at the slower bolus rate of 1-2.5 mils (SLOW-HOCM group); 650 patients were in the FAST-HOCM group and received the same ionic contrast medium at 4-5 ml/s; 250 patients received lower osmolality contrast medium (LOCM) at 1-2.5 ml/s, forming the SLOW-LOCM group; and 202 patients in the FAST-LOCM group got the same nonionic agent at 4-5 ml/s. Results: We found no significant difference in the rate of nausea among the first three groups: SLOW-HOCM (3.9%), FAST-HOCM (4.9%), and SLOW-LOCM (3.2%). A statistically significant lower incidence of nausea (0.5%) was found in the FAST-LOCM group. Anaphylactoid reactions were significantly more common in both groups who received HOCM (8.3 and 9.1%) compared with the groups who received LOCM (2.0 and 2.5%). Conclusion: The bolus injection of warmed ionic contrast medium at a rate of 1-2.5 ml/s causes no significant increase in nausea compared with similar infusion rates of nonionic agents. For CT protocols that require infusion rates of 4-5 ml/s, the use of a nonionic agent is associated with a significantly reduced prevalence of nausea. The prevalence of anaphylactoid reactions is not affected by the rate of injection.
引用
收藏
页码:341 / 345
页数:5
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   ACUTE REACTIONS TO INTRAVASCULAR CONTRAST-MEDIA - TYPES, RISK-FACTORS, RECOGNITION, AND SPECIFIC TREATMENT [J].
BUSH, WH ;
SWANSON, DP .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1991, 157 (06) :1153-1161
[2]   INTRAVASCULAR CONTRAST-MEDIA - ADVERSE REACTIONS [J].
COHAN, RH ;
DUNNICK, NR .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1987, 149 (04) :665-670
[3]  
*COUNC AM COLL RAD, 1990, ACR STAND CURR CRIT
[4]   INJECTION RATE - A FACTOR IN CONTRAST REACTIONS [J].
DUDDY, MJ ;
MANNS, RA ;
WORMALD, SA .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1990, 41 (01) :42-43
[5]   ADVERSE REACTIONS TO UROGRAPHIC CONTRAST-MEDIUM - RAPID VERSUS SLOW INJECTION RATE [J].
JENSEN, N ;
DORPH, S .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1980, 53 (631) :659-661
[6]   ADVERSE REACTIONS TO IONIC AND NONIONIC CONTRAST-MEDIA - A REPORT FROM THE JAPANESE-COMMITTEE-ON-THE-SAFETY-OF-CONTRAST MEDIA [J].
KATAYAMA, H ;
YAMAGUCHI, K ;
KOZUKA, T ;
TAKASHIMA, T ;
SEEZ, P ;
MATSUURA, K .
RADIOLOGY, 1990, 175 (03) :621-628
[7]   IONIC AND NONIONIC IODINATED CONTRAST-MEDIA - EVOLUTION AND STRATEGIES FOR USE [J].
MCCLENNAN, BL .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1990, 155 (02) :225-233
[8]  
OLINTRAVENOUSER JH, 1996, RADIOLOGY, V201, P1
[9]  
PALMER F J, 1988, Australasian Radiology, V32, P426, DOI 10.1111/j.1440-1673.1988.tb02770.x
[10]   ADVERSE REACTIONS TO INTRAVASCULARLY ADMINISTERED CONTRAST-MEDIA - COMPREHENSIVE STUDY BASED ON A PROSPECTIVE SURVEY [J].
SHEHADI, WH .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1975, 124 (01) :145-152