Dataset Information

Management of Adverse Reactions to Iodinated Contrast Media for Computed Tomography in Korean Referral Hospitals: A Survey Investigation.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the current status of managing adverse reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) for computed tomography in referral hospitals in South Korea compared with hospitals in other countries.

Materials and methods

This survey investigation involved 59 Korean and 15 overseas hospitals using guideline-based questionnaires consisting of 24 items in 7 main categories related to managing adverse reactions to ICM.

Results

Informed written consent with risk factor evaluation was appropriately performed in most of the Korean hospitals. There was considerable variability in assessing renal function across the hospitals; serum creatinine level was used as a reference in 76.4% of Korean hospitals. The Korean hospitals preferred a more stringent approach to determining normal renal function (p = 0.01), withholding metformin (p = 0.01), and fasting before ICM exposure (p < 0.001) compared with overseas hospitals. All the Korean hospitals had an emergency protocol and in-hospital system for adverse reactions to ICM. The Korean (87.7%) and overseas hospitals (100%) were similarly equipped with epinephrine (p = 0.332), but only 38.6% of Korean hospitals were equipped with a bronchodilator (p = 0.004). For patients with a previous hypersensitivity reaction to ICM, 62.3% of Korean hospitals pre-medicated with anti-histamine and corticosteroid according to the severity of the previous reaction, and changed the culprit ICM in 52.8%, while skin test was performed in 17%.

Conclusion

In general, Korean referral hospitals were well-prepared regarding informed consent, protocol, and an in-hospital system for managing adverse reactions to ICM. Nevertheless, there was considerable variability in details and management, thus requiring standardization by reflecting current guidelines.

SUBMITTER: Han S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6315078 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Management of Adverse Reactions to Iodinated Contrast Media for Computed Tomography in Korean Referral Hospitals: A Survey Investigation.

Han Seungchul S Yoon Soon Ho SH Lee Whal W Choi Young-Hun YH Kang Dong Yoon DY Kang Hye-Ryun HR

Korean journal of radiology 20181227 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the current status of managing adverse reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) for computed tomography in referral hospitals in South Korea compared with hospitals in other countries.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This survey investigation involved 59 Korean and 15 overseas hospitals using guideline-based questionnaires consisting of 24 items in 7 main categories related to managing adverse reactions to ICM.<h4>Results</h4>Informed written consent with risk facto ...[more]

PMID: 30627030

Similar Datasets

Project description:The incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to iodinated contrast media (ICM) has risen over last years, representing an important health problem. HSRs to ICMs are classified into immediate reactions (IRs) and non-immediate reactions (NIRs) according to if they occur within 1 h or longer after ICM administration. The diagnosis of HSRs to ICM is complex as skin test (ST) sensitivity ranges widely, and drug provocation test (DPT) protocols are heterogeneous. In this manuscript, we describe the clinical characteristics of a series of patients confirmed as HSR to ICM and the diagnosis procedure carried out, looking into those cases confirmed as HSRs to multiple ICMs. For this purpose, we prospectively evaluated patients suggestive of HSRs to ICMs and classified them as IRs or NIRs. STs were carried out using a wide panel of ICMs, and in those with a negative ST, a single-blind placebo controlled DPT was performed with the culprit. If ST or DPT were positive, then tolerance was assessed with an alternative negative ST ICM. We included 101 cases (12 IRs and 89 NIRs) confirmed as allergic. Among them, 36 (35.64%) cases were allergic to more than one ICM (8 IRs and 28 NIRs). The most common ICM involved were iomeprol and iodixanol. Although not statistically significant, the percentage of patients reporting anaphylaxis was higher in patients allergic to multiple ICMs compared with patients allergic to a single ICM (50 vs. 25%). Likewise, the percentage of positive results in STs was higher in patients allergic to multiple ICMs compared with those allergic to a single ICM (for IR 62.5 vs. 25%, p > 0.05; and for NIR, 85.71 vs. 24.59%, p < 0.000). In cases allergic to more than one ICM, DPT with negative-ST ICM was positive in more than 60% (24/36) of cases. Therefore, allergy to multiple ICMs is common, associated to severe reactions in IRs, and confirmed frequently by positive STs. The allergological work-up should include DPT not only to establish the diagnosis but also to identify safe alternative ICM, even if ICM is structurally unrelated and ST is negative. More studies are needed to clarify mechanisms underlying cross-reactivity among ICMs.

Project description:In recent years, there has been a large-scale dissemination of guidelines in radiology in the form of Reporting & Data Systems (RADS). The use of iodinated contrast media (ICM) has a fundamental role in enhancing the diagnostic capabilities of computed tomography (CT) but poses certain risks. The scope of the present review is to summarize the current role of ICM only in clinical reporting guidelines for CT that have adopted the "RADS" approach, focusing on three specific questions per each RADS: (I) what is the scope of the scoring system; (II) how is ICM used in the scoring system; (III) what is the impact of ICM enhancement on the scoring. We analyzed the original articles for each of the latest versions of RADS that can be used in CT [PubMed articles between January, 2005 and March, 2023 in English and American College of Radiology (ACR) official website]. We found 14 RADS suitable for use in CT out of 28 RADS described in the literature. Four RADS were validated by the ACR: Colonography-RADS (C-RADS), Liver Imaging-RADS (LI-RADS), Lung CT Screening-RADS (Lung-RADS), and Neck Imaging-RADS (NI-RADS). One RADS was validated by the ACR in collaboration with other cardiovascular scientific societies: Coronary Artery Disease-RADS 2.0 (CAD-RADS). Nine RADS were proposed by other scientific groups: Bone Tumor Imaging-RADS (BTI-RADS), Bone‑RADS, Coronary Artery Calcium Data & Reporting System (CAC-DRS), Coronavirus Disease 2019 Imaging-RADS (COVID-RADS), COVID-19-RADS (CO-RADS), Interstitial Lung Fibrosis Imaging-RADS (ILF-RADS), Lung-RADS (LU-RADS), Node-RADS, and Viral Pneumonia Imaging-RADS (VP-RADS). This overview suggests that ICM is not strictly necessary for the study of bones and calcifications (CAC-DRS, BTI-RADS, Bone-RADS), lung parenchyma (Lung-RADS, LU-RADS, COVID-RADS, CO-RADS, VP-RADS and ILF-RADS), and in CT colonography (C-RADS). On the other hand, ICM plays a key role in CT angiography (CAD-RADS), in the study of liver parenchyma (LI-RADS), and in the evaluation of soft tissues and lymph nodes (NI-RADS, Node-RADS). Future studies are needed in order to evaluate the impact of the new iodinated and non-iodinate contrast media, artificial intelligence tools and dual energy CT in the assignment of RADS scores.

Project description:ObjectiveTo review the efficacy of pharmacological prevention of serious reactions to iodinated contrast media.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesSystematic search (multiple databases, bibliographies, all languages, to October 2005) for randomised comparisons of pretreatment with placebo or no treatment (control) in patients receiving iodinated contrast media. Review methods Trial quality was assessed by all investigators. Information on trial design, population, interventions, and outcomes was abstracted by one investigator and cross checked by the others. Data were combined by using Peto odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsNine trials (1975-96, 10 011 adults) tested H1 antihistamines, corticosteroids, and an H1-H2 combination. No trial included exclusively patients with a history of allergic reactions. Many outcomes were not allergy related, and only a few were potentially life threatening. No reports on death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, irreversible neurological deficit, or prolonged hospital stays were found. In two trials, 3/778 (0.4%) patients who received oral methylprednisolone 2x32 mg or intravenous prednisolone 250 mg had laryngeal oedema compared with 11/769 (1.4%) controls (odds ratio 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.88). In two trials, 7/3093 (0.2%) patients who received oral methylprednisolone 2x32 mg had a composite outcome (including shock, bronchospasm, and laryngospasm) compared with 20/2178 (0.9%) controls (odds ratio 0.28, 0.13 to 0.60). In one trial, 1/196 (0.5%) patients who received intravenous clemastine 0.03 mg/kg and cimetidine 2-5 mg/kg had angio-oedema compared with 8/194 (4.1%) controls (odds ratio 0.20, 0.05 to 0.76).ConclusionsLife threatening anaphylactic reactions due to iodinated contrast media are rare. In unselected patients, the usefulness of premedication is doubtful, as a large number of patients need to receive premedication to prevent one potentially serious reaction. Data supporting the use of premedication in patients with a history of allergic reactions are lacking. Physicians who are dealing with these patients should not rely on the efficacy of premedication.

Project description:IntroductionIodinated contrast media are commonly used in medical imaging and can cause hypersensitivity reactions, including rare but severe life-threatening reactions. Although several prophylactic approaches have been proposed for severe reactions, their effects remain unclear. Therefore, we aim to review systematically the preventive effects of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions and predictors of acute, hypersensitivity reactions.Methods and analysisWe will search the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from 1 January 1990 through 31 December 2019 and will examine the bibliographies of eligible studies, pertinent review articles and clinical practice guidelines. We will include prospective and retrospective studies of any design that evaluated the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological preventive interventions for adverse reactions of non-ionic iodinated contrast media. Two assessors will independently extract the characteristics of the study and intervention and the quantitative results. Two independent reviewers will assess the risk of bias using standard design-specific validity assessment tools. The primary outcome will be reduction in acute contrast media-induced hypersensitivity reactions. The secondary outcomes will include characteristics associated with the development of contrast media-induced acute hypersensitivity reactions, and adverse events associated with specific preventive interventions. Unique premedication regimens (eg, dose, drug and duration) and non-pharmacological strategies will be analysed separately. Average-risk and high-risk patients will be considered separately. A meta-analysis will be performed if appropriate.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not applicable, as this will be a secondary analysis of publicly available data. The results of the analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42019134003.

Dataset Information

Management of Adverse Reactions to Iodinated Contrast Media for Computed Tomography in Korean Referral Hospitals: A Survey Investigation.

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Management of Adverse Reactions to Iodinated Contrast Media for Computed Tomography in Korean Referral Hospitals: A Survey Investigation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets