Delayed reactions to urographic contrast media
- 1 January 1986
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in The British Journal of Radiology
- Vol. 59 (697) , 41-44
- https://doi.org/10.1259/0007-1285-59-697-41
Abstract
Reactions to urographic contrast media occurring after the patient had left the department were studied by giving patients a questionnaire to complete. 841 questionnaires were returned (about 80% of those issued). 70% of patients had no delayed reactions and 7% expressed a positive response to urography i.e., found the procedure interesting and not unpleasant; 13% had arm pain, 5% a rash and 14% had a variety of reactions, many of which were the same as those described in iodism. Women had significantly more rashes (7%) than men (4%) and those media containing the meglumine or iodamide ions caused more rashes than other media. Conray 420 caused more arm pain than Conray 280 or the non-ionic media, which would be expected from the known effects on vascular endothelium. Symptoms of iodism were equally common from the various contrast media.This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- The old and the new: a study of five contrast media for urographyThe British Journal of Radiology, 1985
- Contrast agent induced thrombophlebitis following leg phlebography: iopamidol versus meglumine iothalamateThe British Journal of Radiology, 1984
- The Current Status of Reactions to Intravenous Contrast MediaInvestigative Radiology, 1980
- Fixed Eruption and Fever After UrographySouthern Medical Journal, 1980
- Acute reactions to urographic contrast media.BMJ, 1975
- Evanescent enlargement of salivary glands following tri-iodinated contrast mediaThe British Journal of Radiology, 1972
- A national survey of radiological complications: Interim reportClinical Radiology, 1968
- Observations on Venous Endothelial Injury Following the Injection of Various Radiographic Contrast Media in the RatJournal of Neurosurgery, 1961