PubMed · 10794869
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
B B Goldberg. 2000. Contrast agents.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0301-5629(00)00158-7
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis are aimed at evaluating the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) following administration of clinically approved ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) in adults and children, to assess risks in patients with cardiovascular disease and in pregnancy, and to evaluate the effectiveness of emergency management of severe ADRs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PRISMA 2020 systematic review was conducted searching PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed quality. Incidence estimates were pooled when feasible, stratified by age group, contrast agent, and administration route. RESULTS: Seventy-four studies encompassing > 1 million adults and > 36,000 children were included, contributing multiple analytic cohorts to the quantitative synthesis. Severe acute ADRs were extremely rare (6 and 16 cases per 100,000 in adults and children, respectively) and absent following endocavitary administration in children. Non-severe acute ADRs occurred in 11 and 8 cases per 10,000 adults and children, respectively. Delayed reactions were very rare (< 1 case per million in adults). No significant safety differences emerged between UCA products. The incidence of ADRs in patients with cardiovascular disease was analogous to the general population. No ADRs were reported in pregnant women. Standard emergency management was effective in almost all serious cases, though rare fatalities occurred. CONCLUSION: UCAs show an excellent safety profile in adults and children, with very rare severe ADRs and few non-severe, typically self-limiting reactions. Strict adherence to recommended emergency management protocols mitigates the remaining risks, supporting safe use across a broad range of clinical indications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023432668. KEY POINTS: Question What is the incidence, type, and severity of acute and delayed ADRs associated with clinically approved UCAs across different patient populations? Findings Severe acute adverse reactions are very rare, and non-severe reactions are rare and self-limiting, with no significant safety differences between adults, children, or patients with cardiovascular disease. Clinical relevant UCAs show an excellent safety profile across populations. These findings support their safe clinical use as reliable alternatives to iodine-based and gadolinium-based contrast agents in routine diagnostic imaging.
Suboptimal left ventricular (LV) cavity visualization and endocardial border delineation often compromise the clinical utility of echocardiography. This study examines the safety and efficacy of perflutren, a novel ultrasound contrast agent, for LV cavity opacification and endocardial border delineation in patients with suboptimal baseline echocardiograms. In a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, 211 patients with suspected cardiac disease and suboptimal baseline echocardiograms were enrolled at 17 sites. Two intravenous injections of either placebo (saline) or perflutren (5 or 10 microl/kg) were given approximately 30 minutes apart. Images of the apical 4- and 2-chamber views were acquired and scored. Perflutren opacified the LV cavity after both dosages (5 and 10 microl/kg dosages). Clinically useful contrast was observed in 89% of patients who received perflutren and in 0% of patients who received placebo (p < 0.01). Quantitative assessment of LV opacification with videodensitometry showed similar results. The mean duration of clinically useful contrast was 90 seconds. Improvement in endocardial border delineation was demonstrated in 91% of patients who received perflutren and in 12% of those who received placebo (p < 0.001). Following perflutren, an average of 4 more segments per patient were evaluable compared with baseline. Salvage of nondiagnostic baseline examinations by perflutren was demonstrated in 48% of eligible subjects. The safety profile of perflutren was similar to placebo. These data indicate that administration of perflutren to patients with suboptimal baseline images is well tolerated and provides substantial LV cavity opacification and improvement in endocardial border delineation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.