Safety profile and protocol prevention of adverse reactions to uroangiographic contrast media in diagnostic imaging.

Abstract The purpose of the study is to examine the incidence of adverse reactions caused by non-ionic contrast media in selected patients after desensitization treatment and to evaluate the safety profile of organ iodine contrast media (i.c.m.) in a multistep prevention protocol. In a population of 2000 patients that had received a CT scan, 100 patients with moderate/high risk for adverse reactions against iodinated contrast agents followed a premedication protocol and all adverse reactions are reported and classified as mild, moderate or severe. 1.7 percent of the pre-treated patients reported a mild, immediate type reaction to iodine contrast; of these five patients with allergy 0.71 percent had received iomeprol, 0.35 percent received ioversol and 0.71 percent received iopromide. The incidence of adverse reactions was reported to be higher (4 out of 5 patients) among those that referred a history of hypersensitivity against iodinated i.c.m. Although intravenous contrast materials have greatly improved, especially in terms of their safety profile, they should not be administered if there isn't a clear or justified indication. In conclusion, even if we know that the majority of these reactions are idiosyncratic and unpredictable we propose, with the aim of improving our knowledge on this subject, a multicenter study, based on skin allergy tests (prick test, patch test, intradermal reaction) in selected patients that have had previous experiences of hypersensitivity against parenteral organ iodine contrast media.