What question did this study set out to answer?

To prospectively determine the incidence of adverse events in angiography related to high-osmolality versus low-osmolality contrast agents and assess whether patient risk factors predict increased adverse event risk.

June 1, 1997Radiology

Adverse events with radiographic contrast agents: results of the SCVIR Contrast Agent Registry.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

MBM A BettmannAtrium Health Wake Forest Baptist THTimothy HeerenBoston University AGAlan J. GreenfieldSprint (United States)

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Prospective registry reveals higher adverse event rates with high-osmolality contrast agents in angiography, indicating limited safety gains from universal low-osmolality agent use.

Key Points

To prospectively determine the incidence of adverse events in angiography related to high-osmolality versus low-osmolality contrast agents and assess whether patient risk factors predict increased adverse event risk.
Prospective multicenter registry tracking all angiography patients across 26 high-volume institutions from July 1, 1990, to June 30, 1992 (N=60,891 patients undergoing 75,616 procedures).
Recorded demographic factors, baseline medical status, contrast history, procedural details, and all adverse events occurring up to 12 hours post-procedure.
Assessed exposure across nonionic low-osmolality contrast agents (56%), ionic low-osmolality contrast agents (8%), and high-osmolality contrast agents (36%).
Overall contrast-related adverse events and those requiring medical treatment were significantly higher with high-osmolality contrast agents compared to low-osmolality contrast agents for nearly all procedures (P < .001), except arterial interventions.
Serious adverse event rates did not significantly differ between contrast classes, except during cardiac procedures where differences emerged.
A previous reaction to contrast media was the strongest predictor of a subsequent adverse event, with overall risk also heightened during cardiac and interventional procedures.

Cite This Study

Bettmann et al. (1997) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa932a8e6a6728514255872 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.203.3.9169677

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Prospective registry reveals higher adverse event rates with high-osmolality contrast agents in angiography, indicating limited safety gains from universal low-osmolality agent use.

Adverse events with radiographic contrast agents: results of the SCVIR Contrast Agent Registry.

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Adverse events with radiographic contrast agents: results of the SCVIR Contrast Agent Registry.

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider