Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Contrast media for fluoroscopic examinations of the GI and GU tracts: current challenges and recommendations

  • Pictorial Essay
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the significant challenges facing radiologists who perform and interpret studies of the gastrointestinal and genitourinary systems have been periodic interruptions in the availability of barium and iodinated contrast media specially formulated for gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) studies. These interruptions are due to the US Food and Drug Administration’s recent requirement for more stringent documentation of the safety and efficacy of contrast media and the consolidation among contrast manufacturers. Therefore, radiologists may be required to recommend an alternative means of evaluation, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance, or endoscopy, or they may need to substitute a different formulation of a contrast agent not specifically developed for GI or GU use, for example the utilization of an agent designed and marketed for vascular use. This article reviews the current status of fluoroscopic contrast media, and provides suggestions and recommendations for the optimal and alternative use of contrast media formulations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L, Frangos AJ, Sunshine JH (2008) Recent trends in utilization rates of abdominal imaging: the relative roles of radiologists and nonradiologist physicians. J Am Coll Radiol 5:744–747

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Boyajian DA, Margulis AR (2008) The GI fluoroscopy suite in the early twenty-first century. Abdom Imaging 33:200–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Howell WLJ (2013) Barium shortage affecting radiology practices. Diagnostic imaging. http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/contrast-agents/barium-shortage-affecting-radiology-practices. Accessed 22 June 2016.

  4. American College of Radiology (ACR) committee on drugs and contrast media (2015) ACR manual on contrast media. Version 10.1. http://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/PDF/QualitySafety/Resources/Contrast%20Manual/2015_Contrast_Media.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2016.

  5. Ott DJ, Gelfand DW (1983) Gastrointestinal contrast agents. Indications, uses, and risks. JAMA 249:2380–2384

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Seltzer SE, Jones B, McLaughlin GC (1979) Proper choice of contrast agents in emergency gastrointestinal radiology. CRC Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 12:79–99

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Miller RE, Skucas J (1977) Radiographic contrast agents. Baltimore: University Park Press

    Google Scholar 

  8. Davidson JC, Einstein DM, Herts BR, et al. (1999) Comparison of two barium suspensions for dedicated small-bowel series. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:379–382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Thoeni RF (1987) Radiography of the small bowel and enteroclysis. A perspective. Invest Radiol 22:930–936

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Abbas S, Bissett IP, Parry BR (2007) Oral water soluble contrast for the management of adhesive small bowel obstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD004651

    Google Scholar 

  11. Branco BC, Barmparas G, Schnüriger B, et al. (2010) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic and therapeutic role of water-soluble contrast agent in adhesive small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg 97:470–478

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rubesin SE, Levine MS (2003) Radiologic diagnosis of gastrointestinal perforation. Radiol Clin North Am 41:1095–1115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Buecker A, Wein BB, Neurburg JM, Guenther RW (1997) Esophageal perforation: comparison of use of aqueous and barium-containing contrast media. Radiology 202:683–686

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tanomkiat W, Galassi W (2000) Barium sulfate as a contrast medium for evaluation of postoperative anastomotic leaks. Acta Radiol 41:482–485

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Swanson JO, Levine MS, Redfern RO, Rubesin SE (2003) Usefulness of high-density barium for detection of leaks after esophagogastrectomy, total gastrectomy, and total laryngectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:415–420

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gelfand DW, Ott DJ, Hunt TH (1981) Gastrointestinal complications of radiologic procedures. In: Meyers MA, Ghahremani GG (eds) Iatrogenic gastrointestinal complications. New York: NY, Springer-Verlag, pp 91–122

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. de Feiter PW, Soeters PB, Dejong CH (2006) Rectal perforations after barium enema: a review. Dis Colon Rectum 49:261–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Biondo S, Pares D, Mora L, et al. (2003) Randomized clinical study of gastrografin administration in patients with adhesive small bowel obstruction. Br J Surg 90:542–546

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Burge J, Abbas SM, Roadley G, et al. (2005) Randomized controlled trial of gastrografin in adhesive small bowel obstruction. ANZ J Surg 75:672–674

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kapoor S, Jain G, Sewkani A, et al. (2006) Prospective evaluation of oral Gastrografin in postoperative small bowel obstruction. J Surg Res 131:256–260

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Di Saverio, Catena F, Ansaloni L, et al. (2008) Water-soluble contrast medium (Gastrografin) value in adhesive small intestine obstruction (ASIO): a prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical trial. World J Surg 32:2293–2304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Culp WC (1975) Relief of severe fecal impactions with water-soluble contrast enemas. Radiology 115:9–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gelfand DW, Ott DJ (1982) Barium sulfate suspensions: an evaluation of available products. AJR Am J Roentgenol 138:935–941

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Laufer I, Levine MS (eds) (1992) Double contrast gastrointestinal radiology, 2nd edn. WB Saunders: Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  25. Brick SH, Caroline DF, Lev-Toaff AS, et al. (1988) Esophageal disruption: evaluation with iohexol esophagography. Radiology 169:141–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stordahl A (1989) Water-soluble contrast media in obstructed in ischemic small intestine. A clinical and experimental study. J Oslo City Hosp 39:3–22

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. James AE Jr, Montali RJ, Chaffee V, Strecker EP, Vessal K (1975) Barium or gastrografin: which contrast media for diagnosis of esophageal tears? Gastroenterology 68:1103–1113

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vessal K, Montali RJ, Larson SM, Chaffee V, James AE Jr (1975) Evaluation of barium and gastrografin as contrast media for the diagnosis of esophageal ruptures or perforations. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 123:307–319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Levine MS (2015) Miscellaneous abnormalities of the esophagus. In: Gore RM, Levine MS (eds) Textbook of gastrointestinal radiology, 4th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier, pp 412–437

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wylie R, Hyams JS, Kay M (eds) (2016) Pediatric gastrointestinal and liver disease, 5th edn. Philadelphia: Elsevier

    Google Scholar 

  31. Butt J, Hentges D, Pelican G, et al. (1978) Bacteremia during barium enema study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 130:715–718

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Le Frock J, Ellis CA, Klainer AS, Weinstein L (1975) Transient bacteremia associated with barium enema. Arch Intern Med 135:835–837

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Schimmel DH, Hanelin LG, Cohen S, Goldberg HI (1977) Bacteremia and the barium enema. AJR Am J Roentgenol 128:207–208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Arpurt JP, Caroli-Bosc FX, Harris A, Delmont J (1992) Reflux of air or barium into the biliary ducts. Gastroenterology 103:1989–1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Walsham A, Larsen J (2008) Adverse effects of barium sulfate in the biliary tract. Diagn Interv Radiol 14:94–96

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zeman RK, Burrell MI (1987) The postoperative biliary tract. Gallbladder and bile duct imaging: a clinical radiologic approach. New York: Churchill Livingston, pp 593–676

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hunter TB, Fajardo LL (1987) Outline of radiographic contrast agents. Appl Radiol 16:137–158

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hanson JA, Borre C, Rivers G (1998) What is your diagnosis? Foreign body obstruction of the duodenum with reflux of barium sulfate into the gallbladder and intrahepatic bile ducts. J Am Vet Med Assoc 213:1257–1258

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Foley MJ, Ghahremani GG, Rogers LF (1982) Reappraisal of contrast media used to detect upper gastrointestinal perforations: comparison of ionic water-soluble media with barium sulfate. Radiology 144:231–237

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Reich SB (1969) Production of pulmonary edema by aspiration of water-soluble nonabsorbable contrast media. Radiology 92:367–370

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Horton KM, Fishman EK, Gayler B (2008) The use of iohexol as oral contrast for computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 32:207–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Eisenberg RL, Hedgcock MW, Shanser JD, et al. (1979) Iodine absorption from the gastrointestinal tract during Hypaque-enema examination. Radiology 133:597–599

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rosen RS, Jacobson G (1965) Visible urinary tract excretion following oral administration of water-soluble contrast media. Radiology 84:1031–1032

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Halme L, Edgren J, von Smitten K, Linden H (1993) Increased urinary excretion of iohexol after enteral administration in patients with ileal Crohn’s disease. a new test for disease activity. Acta Radiol 34:237–241

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Marinelli DL, Mintz MC (1987) Absorption and excretion of dilute Gastrografin during computed tomography in pseudomembranous colitis. J Comput Tomogr 11:236–238

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Miller SH (1997) Anaphylactoid reaction after oral administration of diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:959–961

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Gmeinwieser J, Erhardt W, Reimann HJ, et al. (1990) Side effects of water-soluble contrast agents in upper gastrointestinal tract. Invest Radiol 25(suppl 1):S27–S28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Sable RA, Rosenthal WS, Siegel J, Ho R, Jankowski RH (1983) Absorption of contrast medium during ERCP. Dig Dis Sci 28:801–806

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Moskovitz AH, Bush WH Jr, Horvath KD (2001) Anaphylactoid reaction to intraoperative cholangiogram. report of a case, review of literature, and guidelines for prevention. Surg Endosc 15:1227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Clement O, Webb JAW (2014) Acute adverse reactions to contrast media: mechanisms and prevention. In: Thomsen HS, Webb JAW (eds) Contrast media. Safety issues and ESUR guidelines, 3rd edn. Germany: Springer, p 57

    Google Scholar 

  51. Omnipaque (iohexol) injection package insert. GE Healthcare website. http://www3.gehealthcare.com/en/products/categories/contrast_media/omnipaque. Published 2010. Accessed 14 May 2016.

  52. Gastrografin (diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution USP) package insert. Bracco Diagnostics website. http://imaging.bracco.com/us-en/products-and-solutions/contrast-media/gastrografin/prescribing-information, Published 2013. Accessed 14 May 2016.

  53. Gastroview (diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium solution USP) package insert. Mallinckrodt website. http://www.mallinckrodt.com/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=480, Published September 2014. Accessed 14 May 2016.

  54. Diagnostic Radiology, Yale School of Medicine. Oral contrast policies. Yale School of Medicine website. http://medicine.yale.edu/diagnosticradiology/patientcare/policies/oralcontrast.aspx, Published 16 September 2011. Accessed 14 May 2016.

  55. Pasternak JJ, Williamson EE (2012) Clinical pharmacology, uses, and adverse reactions of iodinated contrast agents: a primer for the non-radiologist. Mayo Clin Proc 87:390–402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Katayama H, Yamaguchi K, Kozuka T, et al. (1990) Adverse reactions to ionic and non-ionic contrast media. a report from the Japanese committee on the safety of contrast media. Radiology 175:621–628

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Bova JG, Jurdi RA, Bennett WF (1993) Antispasmodic drugs to reduce discomfort and colonic spasm during barium enemas: comparison of oral hyoscyamine, i.v. glucagon, and no drug. AJR Am J Roentgenol 161:965–968

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Thoeni RF, Margulis AR (1988) The state of radiographic technique in the examination of the colon: a survey in 1987. Radiology 167:7–12

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Harned RK, Stelling CB, Williams S, Wolf GL (1976) Glucagon and barium enema examinations: a controlled clinical trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 126:981–984

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Chernish SM, Maglinte DD (1990) Glucagon: common untoward reactions—review and recommendations. Radiology 177:145–146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Chernish SM, Maglinte DD, Brunelle RL (1988) The laboratory response to glucagon dosages used in gastrointestinal examinations. Invest Radiol 23:847–852

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. GlucaGen (glucagon [rDNA origin] for injection) package insert. Novo Nordisk website. http://docs.boehringer-ingelheim.com/Prescribing%20Information/PIs/Ben%20Venue_Bedford%20Labs/55390-004-01%20GLU/5539000401?DMW_FORMAT=pdf. Published 29 December 2011. Accessed 22 June 2016.

  63. Scian LF, Westermann CD, Verdesca AS, et al. (1960) Adrenocortical and medullary effects of glucagon. Amer J Physiol. 199:867–870

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Lawrence AM (1965) A new provocative test for pheochromocytoma (abstract). Ann Intern Med. 63:905–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Freestone S, Duffield J, Lee MR (1996) Pressor effect of metoclopramide in phaeochromocytoma. Postgrad Med J 72:188–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Sewell DD, Kodsi AB, Caligiuri MP, Jeste DV (1994) Metoclopramide and tardive dyskinesia. Biol Psychiatry 36:630–632

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford University Medical Center, 300 Pasteur Drive, Rm H1330, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Michael P. Federle

  2. Duke University Medical Center, Box 3808 DUMC, Durham, NC, 27710, USA

    Tracy A. Jaffe

  3. Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, 200 Lothrop St, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

    Peter L. Davis

  4. University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical center Dr, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary

  5. University Hospital, Room B1 D502, San Antonio, USA

    Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary

  6. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Marc S. Levine

Authors
  1. Michael P. Federle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tracy A. Jaffe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter L. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marc S. Levine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael P. Federle.

Ethics declarations

Funding

There was no funding associated with this manuscript.

Conflict of interest

Michael P. Federle is/has been a consultant for Bracco Diagnostics, Inc. Tracy A. Jaffe declares that she has no conflict of interest. Peter L. Davis declares that he has no conflict of interest. Mahmoud M. Al-Hawary declares that he has no conflict of interest. Marc S. Levine is/has been a consultant for Bracco Diagnostics.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Federle, M.P., Jaffe, T.A., Davis, P.L. et al. Contrast media for fluoroscopic examinations of the GI and GU tracts: current challenges and recommendations. Abdom Radiol 42, 90–100 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0861-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0861-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation