Acute adverse reactions to iopromide<i>vs</i>iomeprol: a retrospective analysis of spontaneous reporting from a radiology department

Garcia, Mario; Aguirre, Urko; Martinez, A. Gomez; Ruiz, Berta; Lertxundi, Unax; Aguirre, C

doi:10.1259/bjr.20130511

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[5][6][7] However, with the introduction of nonionic low-osmolality ICM, the reported frequency of vomiting has declined with varying range, from 1% or less to 11.7%, lessening the rationale of the fasting. 1,5,[8][9][10][11] Although nearly all radiological clinics in industrial countries only use non-ionic ICM, the current preparatory fasting policy regarding fasting duration and content (solids or fluids) varies considerably across hospital and a 4-6 h fasting is one of the most common fasting policies. 1,12 Furthermore, fasting duration before CT examination was heterogeneous across countries, with a tendency of longer fasting duration in Korea than in Europe.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nausea and vomiting after exposure to non-ionic contrast media: incidence and risk factors focusing on preparatory fasting

Kim

Yoon

Choi

et al. 2018

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mild nausea occurred in 2.9% of patients and none vomited in our study population with a 6 h preparatory fast from solid food. Many patients underwent excessive fasting for fluids as well as solid food and their fasting durations were not associated with nausea. Advances in knowledge: We firstly evaluated fasting durations for solid food and fluids, and their impacts on vomiting or nausea after ICM exposure with an instruction of 6 h preparatory fast for solid food: many patients underwent excessive fasting for fluids and the fasting duration was unrelated to nausea.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nausea and vomiting after exposure to non-ionic contrast media: incidence and risk factors focusing on preparatory fasting

Kim

Yoon

Choi

et al. 2018

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Severe hypersensitivity reactions were between 0.010 and 0.024%, with anaphylaxis being the most frequent reaction (Table I) (9,10,18). Regarding the skin patterns observed in these cases, the most frequent were urticaria (between 30.77 and 83.78% of the cases with skin manifestations) (10,13,15,17–19), rash (38.46–85.3%) (9,10,13,19), itching sensation/pruritus (12.82–100%) (10,13–15,17–19), oedema (6.25–17.3%) (12,18,19), erythemas (36.54–100%) (12,14,17–19), angioedema (8%-13.51%) (15,17), and angioneurotic oedema (3.84%) (18) (Fig. 2).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The female sex was associated with increased risk for immediate allergic reactions to ICM between 51.44 and 65.95% (9,10,14,15,17,18). Other risk factors identified included history of previous reactions to ICM (1.2–11.6%) (9,12–15,17), atopy (14.3%) (8), asthma (2.1–12.7%) (9,14,15,17), drug allergy (3.6–25%) (9,14,15,17), and allergic rhinitis (1.5–4%) (14,15,17).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The incidence of skin lesions in contrast media-induced chemical hypersensitivity

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrast agents are used in radiology to increase the sensibility and specificity of radiological techniques. Some of these compounds have side effects that include organ toxicity (with kidney being the most affected organ) and hypersensitivity reactions. We performed multiple PubMed searches from January, 2008 to January, 2018 for studies regarding adverse reactions to compounds used as contrast agents in imagistic techniques. The initial research identified 929 records written in English. After further excluding 223 non-human studies, 292 articles that had irrelevant designs as reviews, meta-analysis, commentaries, editorials and case reports, 414 studies were selected for retrieval. After reading the abstracts, we excluded 363 studies as they had little relevance to the study. In total, 51 full-articles were assessed for eligible studies to be included. Finally, 20 articles were included in the analysis. In our systematic literature search the incidence of overall skin immediate reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) had an incidence between 1.15 and 0.12%, depending on the cohort analyzed in the studies. The percentage of cutaneous manifestations in the cohort that experienced immediate hypersensitivity reactions was between 33.33 and 87.7%. The most frequent skin manifestations were urticaria, rashes, pruritus and limited facial edema. Non-iodinated contrast agents have a safer profile compared with ICM, the incidence of immediate adverse reactions being very low in gadolinium-based contrast agents and other agents used for contrast-enhanced ultrasound. The incidence of delayed reactions was between 10.1 and 0.03%. In the studies analyzed by us the main adverse reactions due to delayed hypersensitivity phenomena were cutaneous manifestations that were present between 70.27 and 100% of the cases. Regarding the risk factors for developing immediate adverse reactions, being female was a predisposing factor accompanied by history of allergy and history of reactions to contrast media. An accurate anamnesis of the patients and a correctly conducted pretreatment can limit the incidence and the severity of the adverse reactions and also can avoid the life occurrence of life-threatening reactions.

show abstract

“…Commonly reported adverse reactions associated with iopromide use include nausea, vomiting, headache and diverse allergic reactions, although severe adverse reactions like anaphylaxis are rare [35]. Additional studies have revealed other specific adverse reactions associated with iopromide use, including contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), skin vasculitis [35] and colitis. [35][36][37][38][39].These studies highlight the importance of careful monitoring for adverse reactions associated with iopromide use in clinical practice.…”

Section: Iopromide Adverse Events Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety asssessment of iopromide contrast media: a narrative review focusing on adverse events

Joaquim,

Matos,

Mateos-Campos

2023

Current Issues in Pharmacy and Medical Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many clinical contexts require radiological exams based on contrast media administration. Iodinated contrast media (ICM) represents one of the most studied contrast agents often used in radiological examinations. ICM vary widely in their physicochemical properties, clinical uses, as well as in the incidence of adverse reactions (ARs). Therefore, a basic understanding of ARs occurrence, risk factors, clinical features, and management of ICM is increasingly important in clinical practice. Iopromide is a nonionic ICM widely used in clinical practice due to its favourable safety profile and numerous applications. This narrative review provides a comprehensive report of the available data concerning iopromide ARs. It also analyses iopromide ARs occurrence and frequency with diverse potential risk factors such as age, sex and pre-existing conditions.

show abstract

Acute adverse reactions to iopromidevsiomeprol: a retrospective analysis of spontaneous reporting from a radiology department

Abstract: Comparative studies of media contrast safety are scarce and summary information on product characteristics is insufficient. This study showed the differences in severity and profile of adverse reactions between iopromide and iomeprol.

Cited by 12 publications

References 17 publications

Nausea and vomiting after exposure to non-ionic contrast media: incidence and risk factors focusing on preparatory fasting

Nausea and vomiting after exposure to non-ionic contrast media: incidence and risk factors focusing on preparatory fasting

The incidence of skin lesions in contrast media-induced chemical hypersensitivity

Safety asssessment of iopromide contrast media: a narrative review focusing on adverse events

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About