Adverse reactions to intravenous iodinated contrast media may be classified as general and organ-specific, such as contrast-induced nephrotoxicity. General adverse reactions may be subclassified into acute and delayed types. Acute general adverse reactions can range from transient minor reactions to life-threatening severe reactions. Non-ionic contrast media have lower risk of mild and moderate adverse reactions. However, the risk of fatal reactions is similar for ionic and non-ionic contrast media. Adequate preprocedure evaluation should be performed to identify predisposing risk factors. Prompt recognition and treatment of acute adverse reactions is crucial. Risk of contrast induced nephrotoxicity can be reduced by use of non-ionic contrast media, less volume of contrast, and adequate hydration. The radiologist can play a pivotal role by being aware of predisposing factors, clinical presentation, and management of adverse reactions to contrast media.
Iodinated contrast media Contrast media Complications Radiocontrast nephropathy Radiology and radiologists Iatrogenic injury
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Siegle R (1993) Rates of idiosyncratic reactions. Ionic versus nonionic contrast media. Invest Radiol 28:S95–S98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegle R, Halvorsen R, Dillon J et al (1991) The use of iohexol in patients with previous reactions to ionic contrast material. Invest Radiol 26:411–416PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang D, Allpern M, Visintainer P et al (1991) Increased risk for anaphylactoid reaction from contrast media in patients on beta-adrenergic blockers or with asthma. Ann Intern Med 115:270–276PubMedGoogle Scholar
Greenberger P, Meyers S, Kramer B (1997) Effects of beta-adrenergic and calcium antagonists on the development of anaphylactoid reactions from radiographic contrast media during cardiac angiography. J Allergy Clin Immunol 80:698–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasser EC, Berry CC, Mishkin MM et al (1994) Pretreatment with corticosteroids to prevent adverse reactions to nonionic contrast media. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:523–526PubMedGoogle Scholar
Greenberger PA, Paterson R. The prevention of immediate generalized reactions to radiocontrast media in high-risk patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 87:867–872Google Scholar
Lasser EC, Berry CC, Talner LB et al (1988) Protective effects of corticosteroids in contrast material anaphylaxis. Invest Radiol 23:S193–S194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasser EC, Berry CC, Talner LB et al (1987) Pretreatment with corticosteroids to alleviate reactions to intravascular contrast media. N Engl J Med 317:845–849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson P, Sidhu PS (1993) Is there a role for corticosteroid prophylaxis in patients at increased risk of adverse reactions to invascular contrast agents? Clin Radiol 48:225–226PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly JF, Patterson R, Lieberman P et al (1978) Radiographic contrast media studies in high-risk patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 62:181–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tippins RB, Torres WE, Baumgartner BR, Baumgarten DA (2000) Are screening serum creatinine levels necessary before outpatient CT examinations? Radiology 216:481–484PubMedGoogle Scholar
Levey AS, Bosch JP, Lewis JB, Greene T, Rogers N, Roth D (1999) A more accurate method to estimate glomerular filtration rate from serum creatinine: a new prediction equation. Ann Intern Med 130:461–470PubMedGoogle Scholar
Namasivayam S, Kalra MK, Ritchie JC et al (2005) Role of reagent strip based rapid creatinine meter in patients undergoing contrast enhanced radiological studies. Presented as a hot topic in the Radiologic Society of North America Annual MeetingGoogle Scholar