medigraphic.com
Órgano Oficial del Hospital Angeles Health System

2003, Número 3

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Acta Med 2003; 1 (3)


Reacciones indeseables y manejo integral de los medios de contraste usados en imagenología

Lozano-Zalce H, Pérez-Mendizábal JA, González-Silva N, Ramírez-Arias JL, Abbud-Neme Y

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 35
Paginas: 139-147
Archivo PDF: 82.45 Kb.


RESUMEN

En el entorno de la medicina moderna la imagenología juega un papel central. El valor para el diagnóstico, el escrutinio, la estadificación y el manejo de las enfermedades son indiscutibles. Muchos de los estudios requieren de la administración de medios de contraste, los cuales son de muchos tipos y con distintas vías de administración. La mayoría implican la vía intravenosa y con medios iodados. Desafortunadamente no están exentos de producir efectos adversos, los cuales en su mayoría, son leves y transitorios aunque en ocasiones pueden ser reacciones graves y que ponen en riesgo la vida. El reconocimiento de las poblaciones susceptibles, así como el diagnóstico temprano y la instauración de un manejo integral hacen la diferencia cuando nos enfrentamos a esta situación. El presente trabajo hace una revisión sobre aspectos generales y particulares acerca de las reacciones adversas a los medios de contraste empleados en la imagenología actual así como su manejo.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Bettmann MA, Heeren T, Greenfield A, et al. Adverse events with radiographic contrast agents: results of the SCVIR Contrast Agent Registry. Radiology 1997; 203: 611-620.

  2. Greenberger PA. Contrast media reactions. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1984: 74; 600-606.

  3. Mikkonen R, Vehmas T, Grandlun H. Seasonal variation in the occurrence of late adverse skin reactions to iodine-based contrast media. Acta Radiol 2000; 41: 390-394.

  4. Nilsson S, Bergstrand L, Jacobsen A-B. Allergic reactions at repeat femoral angiography with ioxalate. Acta Radiol 2001; 42: 608-612.

  5. Yamaguchi K, Katayama H, Takashima T, et al. Prediction of severe adverse reactions to ionic and nonionic contrast media in Japan: evualuation of pretesting. A report from de Japanese Committee on the Safety of Contrast media. Radiology 1991; 178: 363-367.

  6. Thomas M, Peeddicayil J, Koshi T. Adverse reactions to radiocontrast media in a Indian population. Br J Radiol 1999; 72: 648-655.

  7. Cohan RH, Dunnick NR. Intravascular contrast media: adverse reaction. AJR 1987: 149; 665-678.

  8. Moore RD, Steinberg EP, Powe NR, et al. Frequency and determinants of adverse reactions induced by high-osmolality contrast media. Radiology 1989; 170: 727-732.

  9. Katayama H, Yamaguchi K, Kozuka T, et al. Adverse reaction to ionic and nonionic contrast media. Radiology 1990: 175; 621-629.

  10. Goss JE, Chambers CE, Heupler JR, et al. Systemic anaphylactoid reactions to iodinated contrast media during cardiac catheterization procedures: Guidelines for prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Catheter Cardiovasc Diag 1995: 34; 99-107.

  11. Almen T. The etiology of contrast media reactions. Invest Radiol 1994: 29 (S1): 347-358.

  12. Vergara M, Seguel S. Adverse reactions to contrast media in CT: effects of temperature and ionic property. Radiology 1996; 199: 363-366.

  13. Shehadi WH. Contrast media reaction: occurrence, recurrence and distribution patterns. Radiology 1982: 143; 11-17.

  14. Lasser EC, Lyon S, Berry CC. Reports on contrast media reactions: analysis of data from reports to the U.S. Foof and Drug Administration. Radiology 1997: 203; 605-611.

  15. Spring DB, Bettmann, Barkan HE. Nonfatal adverse reactions to iodinated contrast media: spontaneous reporting to the US Food and Drug Administration, 1978-1994. Radiology 1997; 204: 325-239.

  16. Hartman GW, Hattery RR. Mortality during excretory urography: Mayo Clinic experience. AJR 1982: 139; 919-928.

  17. Stacul F, Carraro M, Faccinni L, et al. Contrast agent nephrotoxicity: a comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast agents. AJR 1987: 149; 1287-1293.

  18. Powe NR, Steinberg EP, Erickson JE, et al. Contrast medium-indiced adverse reactions: economic outcome. Radiology 1988; 169: 163-168.

  19. Sistrom CL, Gay SB, Peffley L. Extravasation of iopamidol and iohexol during contrast-enhanced CT: report of 28 cases. Radiology 1991: 180; 707-712.

  20. Cohan RH, Dunnick NR, Leder RA, et al. Extravasation of nonionic radiologic contrast media: efficacy of conservative treatment. Radiology 1990: 176; 65-76.

  21. Feczko PJ. Increased frequency of reactions to contrast materials during gastrointestinal studies. Radiology 1990; 1974: 367-368.

  22. Bush WH, Swanson DP. Acute reactions to intravascular contrast media: types, risk factors, recognition and specific treatment. AJR 1991: 157; 1153-1166.

  23. Nelson KL, Gifford LM, Lauber-Huber C, et al. Clinical safety of gadopentenate dimeglumine. Radiology 1995; 196: 439-443.

  24. Murphy KPJ, Szopinski KT, Cohab RH et al. Ocurrence of adverse reactions to gadolinium-based contrast material and management of patients with risk: a survey of the American Society of Neuroradiology Fellowship Directors. Acad Radiol 1996; 6: 656-674.

  25. Tope WD, Shellock FG. Magnetic resonance imaging and permanent cosmetics (tattoos): survey of complications and adverse effects. JMRI 2002; 15: 180-186.

  26. Lasser EC, Berry CC, Mishkin MM, et al. Pretreatment with corticosteroids to prevent adverse reactions to radiocontrast media. AJR 1994: 165; 523-529.

  27. Freed KS, Leder RA, Alexander C. Breakthrough adverse reactions to low-osmolar contrast media after steroid premedication. AJR 2001; 176: 1389-1393.

  28. Morcos SK, Thomsen HS, Webb JAW. Prevention of generalized reactions to contrast media: a consensus report and guidelines. Eur Radiol 2001; 11: 1720-1745.

  29. Cohan RH, Ellis JH, Dunnick NR. Use of low-osmolar agents and premedication to reduce the frequency of adverse reactions to radiographic contrast media: a survey of the Society of Uroradiology. Radiology 1995: 194; 357-365.

  30. Yoshikawa H. Late adverse reactions to nonionic contrast media. Radiology 1992; 183: 439-443.

  31. Manual on iodinated contrast media. American College of Radiology. Reston, VA. 1991.

  32. Barreto BJ, Parfreny PS, McDonald JR. Nonionic low-osmolality versus ionic high-osmolality contrast material for intravenous use in patients perceived to be at high risk: randomized trial. Radiology 1992; 183: 105-110.

  33. Wolf GL, Arenson RL, Cross AP. A prospective trial of ionic vs. nonionic contrast agents in routine clinical practice: comparison of adverse reactions. AJR 1989: 152; 939-949.

  34. Rydberg J, Charles J, Aspellin P. Frequency of late allergy-like adverse reactions following injection of intravascular non-ionic contrast media: retrospective study comparing a non-ionic monomeric contrast medium with a non-ionic dimeric contrast media. Acta Radiol 1998; 39: 219-228.

  35. Dwyer K. Adverse patients outcomes: a closer look at radiology malpractice claims. Radiology 2002; 222: 395-401.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com