PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9739373

[Pitfalls when using a contrast media injector in MRI].

J T Heverhagen·M Hoppe·N Ishaque·J J Froelich·K J Klose
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

PURPOSE: Using a power injector to applicate Gd-DTPA we found a contrast enhancement of the pyelo-caliceal system even in the native studies, and hence we analysed pitfalls when using power injectors in MRI. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used a power injector Spectris (MedRad, Maastricht, Netherlands). In vitro artifacts were achieved by the mixture of contrast media and saline solution. We substituted contrast media by red water, NaCl by clear water. RESULTS: Using power injectors in MRI, some pitfalls must be avoided, which can render investigations useless, especially dynamic contrast-enhanced investigations. CONCLUSION: In our study we showed an easy way to overcome some pitfalls and use a power injector in MRI in a diagnostically helpful way. The simple use of valves inhibits the mixture of contrast media and saline solution.

Explore related subjects

Contrast MediaEquipment DesignGadolinium DTPAHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsEnglish AbstractJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J T Heverhagen, M Hoppe, N Ishaque, J J Froelich, K J Klose. 1998. [Pitfalls when using a contrast media injector in MRI].. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1015074

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Type, severity, frequency and management of adverse reactions associated with ultrasound contrast agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

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 >&#x2009;1 million adults and >&#x2009;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 (<&#x2009;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.

Contrast Media↗
PubMed2007

Evaluation of conflicting literature and application to formulary decisions.

PURPOSE: Guidelines were developed for grading the quality, quantity, and consistency of drug literature in support of formulary recommendations. METHODS: Four developmental steps were taken to create a comprehensive literature evaluation system. The first step identified the attributes of a body of literature that were most reflective of its applicability to patient care. The next step defined each domain (quality, quantity, consistency), as determined by the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), in terms of the specific qualities to be assessed; a value was assigned to those qualities. Also, a literature search was conducted to identify strategies for evaluating bodies of literature employed in published assessment tools. Following the analysis of previously published systems, which were evaluated with respect to their inclusion of the AHRQ-identified domains, the next step was the development of specific domains and definitions to get a composite grade (with "better" evidence earning more points) for formulary recommendations. The final step was the creation of a system that aggregated the final score for the recommendation. The recommendation was categorized according to quality, quantity, and consistency of supporting evidence, and the total number of points was calculated and the recommendation given letter and numerical grades. RESULTS: The guidelines that were developed allow the user to accurately, consistently, and easily determine the strength of recommendations for a body of literature that may be conflicting. The addition of criteria for quantity and consistency to previously-published grading systems has made the guidelines more objective. CONCLUSION: A system that accounts for the quality, quantity, and consistency of drug literature was developed to assist in making formulary decisions.

Contrast Media↗
PubMed2007

Staging of carcinoma of the uterine cervix and endometrium.

Carcinoma of the uterine cervix and endometrium are common gynecologic malignancies. Both carcinomas are staged and managed by means of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) staging system. In uterine cervical cancer, the FIGO staging system is determined preoperatively by limited conventional procedures. Although this system is effective for early stage disease, it has inherent inaccuracies in advanced stage diseases and does not address nodal involvement. CT and MR imaging are widely used as comprehensive imaging modalities to evaluate tumor size and extent, and nodal involvement. MR imaging is an excellent modality for depicting invasive cervical carcinoma and can provide objective measurement of tumor volume, and provides high negative predictive value for parametrial invasion and stage IVA disease. In contrast, endometrial cancer is surgically staged. Beside recognition of the important prognostic factors, including histologic subtype and grade, accurate assessment of the tumor extent on preoperative MR imaging is expected to greatly optimize surgical procedure and therapeutic strategy. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging can offer "one stop" examination for evaluating the depth of myometrial invasion cervical invasion and nodal metastases. Evaluation of myometrial invasion on MR imaging may be an alternative to gross inspection of the uterus during the surgery.

Contrast Media↗