Anaphylactoid reaction to angiographic contrast media: recurrence despite pretreatment with corticosteroids

Angiography of Hemodialysis Fistulas and Grafts

Angiography of the dialysis access is an important procedure in dealing with dialysis arteriovenous access (AVA) dysfunction. It is an integral part and the initiating procedure for all the interventional procedures performed for the management and salvage of dialysis AVA. The performance of this procedure and normal dialysis access-related anatomy including anatomical variants are discussed. In addition, pathology commonly encountered in association with the anatomy is reviewed.

Emergency pretreatment for contrast allergy before direct percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Patients with previous adverse contrast reactions occasionally present with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Whether they can undergo catheterization safely using current contrast and medications is unknown. We reviewed catheterization laboratory records of all 501 patients (January 2005 to December 2006) presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who underwent emergency coronary angiography. Six patients (1.2%) reported a previous contrast reaction including rash, acute bronchospasm, or anaphylaxis. All received a combination of intravenous steroids and H1 and H2 blockers in the emergency department or catheterization laboratory before catheterization. None of these had complications or evidence of allergy in any patient. In conclusion, some patients with previous contrast reaction may undergo emergency catheterization without adverse consequences, although the safety of this approach has not been proved.

Pharmacological prevention of serious anaphylactic reactions due to iodinated contrast media: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review the efficacy of pharmacological prevention of serious reactions to iodinated contrast media.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic search (multiple databases, bibliographies, all languages, to October 2005) for randomised comparisons of pretreatment with placebo or no treatment (control) in patients receiving iodinated contrast media. Review methods Trial quality was assessed by all investigators. Information on trial design, population, interventions, and outcomes was abstracted by one investigator and cross checked by the others. Data were combined by using Peto odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Nine trials (1975-96, 10 011 adults) tested H1 antihistamines, corticosteroids, and an H1-H2 combination. No trial included exclusively patients with a history of allergic reactions. Many outcomes were not allergy related, and only a few were potentially life threatening. No reports on death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, irreversible neurological deficit, or prolonged hospital stays were found. In two trials, 3/778 (0.4%) patients who received oral methylprednisolone 2x32 mg or intravenous prednisolone 250 mg had laryngeal oedema compared with 11/769 (1.4%) controls (odds ratio 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.88). In two trials, 7/3093 (0.2%) patients who received oral methylprednisolone 2x32 mg had a composite outcome (including shock, bronchospasm, and laryngospasm) compared with 20/2178 (0.9%) controls (odds ratio 0.28, 0.13 to 0.60). In one trial, 1/196 (0.5%) patients who received intravenous clemastine 0.03 mg/kg and cimetidine 2-5 mg/kg had angio-oedema compared with 8/194 (4.1%) controls (odds ratio 0.20, 0.05 to 0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Life threatening anaphylactic reactions due to iodinated contrast media are rare. In unselected patients, the usefulness of premedication is doubtful, as a large number of patients need to receive premedication to prevent one potentially serious reaction. Data supporting the use of premedication in patients with a history of allergic reactions are lacking. Physicians who are dealing with these patients should not rely on the efficacy of premedication.

Contrast media for angiography: physicochemical properties, pharmacokinetics and biocompatibility

Contrast agents are used as diagnostic molecules for the visualization of the vascular system. Despite their rapid pharmacokinetic distribution, and their excretion within a few minutes, their injection is associated with clinical symptoms of relative bioincompatibility. Allergoid reactions and disturbances of the hemostatic system represent the main fields of biological investigations. Due to the extent of clinical and experimental works the ubiquitous interactions between these molecules and cellular and/or protein systems have emerged. The development of a new family of low osmolality ionic or non-ionic contrast molecules had decreased the incidence of minor reactions, but did not modify the frequency of severe accidents and even led to the emergence of new iatrogenic syndromes. Despite extensive laboratory investigations there are still no predictive criteria nor any specific therapeutic prevention of these allergoid reactions. The suggested future line of investigation concerns the physicochemical interaction of CM and targeted biological systems which may allow the analysis and predictivity of these interactions at the molecular level.