Skip to main content

Adverse Reactions and Their Pathophysiology and Management

  • Chapter
Contrast Media in Practice

Abstract

The ideal radiological contrast medium (RCM) should produce no adverse reaction (AR) and the patient should be unaware that he has received an injection, either intravenous or intraarterial. No RCM yet developed has achieved this ideal performance but with the low osmolar contrast media (LOCM) major gains have been made in this respect for both intravenous and intraarterial injection.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davies P, Roberts MB, Roylance J (1975) Acute reactions to urographic contrast media. BMJ 1: 434–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. McCullogh M, Davies P, Richardson RE (1989) A large trial of intravenous Conray 325 and Niopam 300 to assess immediate and delayed reaction. Br Radiol 62: 260–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Panto P, Davies P (1986) Delayed reactions to urographic contrast media. Br J Radiol 59: 41–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pendergrass HP, Tondreau RL, Pendergrass EP, Ritchie DJ, Hildreth EA, Askovitz SI (1958) Reactions associated with intravenous urography: historical and statistical review. Radiology 71: 1–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Witten DM, Hirsch FD, Hartman GW (1973) Acute reactions to urographic contrast medium. AJR 119: 832–840

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wolfram R, Dehouve A, Degand F, Wattez E, Lange R, Crehalet A (1965) Les accidents graves par injection intraveineuse de substances iodées pour urographic. J Electrologie 47: 346–357

    Google Scholar 

  7. Davies P (1989) Abstracts of the International Congress of Radiology, Paris. Abstract 2173, p 344

    Google Scholar 

  8. McCullogh M, Davies P, Richardson RE (1989) A large trial of intravenous Conray 325 and Niopam 300 to assess immediate and delayed reactions. Br J Radiol 62: 260–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pendergrass HP, Tondreau RL, Pendergrass EP, Ritchie DJ, Hildreth EA, Askovitz SI (1958) Reactions associated with intravenous urography: historical and statistical review. Radiology 71: 1–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ansell G et al (1980) The current status of reactions to i.v. CM. Invest Radiol [Suppl]: 32–39

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ansell G (1970) Adverse reactions to CA. Invest Radiol 6: 374–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Committee on Drugs of the American College of Radiology (1977) Prevention and management of adverse reactions to intravascular contrast media. American College of Radiology, Chicago, pp 1–3

    Google Scholar 

  13. Katayama H et al (1990) Adverse reaction to ionic and non-ionic CM. Radiology 175: 621–628

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bauer K (1978) Antigen-antibody like reaction of ioglycamide with an IgM paraprotein in vivo and in vitro. In: Zeitler (Hrsg.) Neue Aspekte des Kontrastmittel-Zwischenfalls. Schering, Berlin, pp 71–78

    Google Scholar 

  15. Brasch RC, Caldwell JL (1976) The allergic theory of radiocontrast agent toxicity: demonstration of antibody activity in sera of patients suffering major radiocontrast agent reactions. Invest Radiol 11: 347–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Harboe M, Foiling I, Haugen OA, Bauer K (1976) Sudden death caused by interaction between a macroglobulin and a divalent drug. Lancet 79/80: 285–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kleinknecht D, Deloux J, Homberg JC (1974) Acute renal failure after intravenous urography: detection of antibodies against contrast media: Clin Nephrol 2: 116

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wakkers-Garritsen BG, Houwerziji J, Nater JP, Wakkers PJM (1976) IgE-me-diated adverse reactivity to a radiographic contrast medium-case report. Ann Allergy 36: 122

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Brasch RC (1980) Evidence supporting an antibody mediation of contrast media reactions. Invest Radiol 15 [Suppl]: S29–S31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Brasch RC, Caldwell JL, Fudenberg HH (1976) Antibodies to radiographic contrast agents: induction and characterization of rabbit antibody. Invest Radiol 11: 1–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Katayama H, Yamaguchi K, Kosuka T, Takashima T, Seez P, Matsuura K (1990) Adverse reactions to ionic and nonionic contrast media. A report from the Japanese Committee on the Safety of contrast Media. Radiology 175: 621–628

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sandstrom C (1955) Secondary reactions from contrast media and the allergy concept. Acta Radiol [Diagn] (Stockh) 44: 233

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Grainger, R. et al. (1993). Adverse Reactions and Their Pathophysiology and Management. In: Dawson, P., Clauß, W. (eds) Contrast Media in Practice. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-97530-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-97530-1_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-57187-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-97530-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics