Patient versus allergy specialist interpretation of a negative workup for suspected iodinated contrast media allergy

Contrast Medium Hypersensitivity: A Large Italian Study with Long-Term Follow-Up

Hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to contrast media (CM) are a major problem. We compared differences of HRs to iodinated contrast media (ICM) versus gadolinium-based contrast media (GBCM), collecting data on prevalence, type, latency and severity. Secondly, the predisposition to perform new contrast tests, use of premedication and possible appearance of new reactions were explored in a long-term follow-up of 5 years. Clinical data, comorbidities, skin test (ST) results, re-exposure to CM procedures with any new reactions, premedication and CM used were collected. In a retrospective single-center study, 350 patients with mild to moderate HRs were enrolled. Asthma, food allergy, non-allergic drug hypersensitivity and neurologic disease were significantly more frequent in patients with HRs to GBCM compared to the high evidence of cardiovascular disease and history of cancer in patients with HRs to ICM. A marked delay in performing STs was reported by patients with negative results (66 months, p < 0.01). Iomeprol, iopamidol and gadobenic acid were the culprit CM most involved in HRs in patients with positive STs. During follow-up, 7.1% of responders reported new HRs to CM despite negative STs, premedication and infusion of alternative CM in most cases.

Subsequent MRI of pediatric patients after an adverse reaction to Gadolinium-based contrast agents

Background

Gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans often must be used repeatedly in pediatric oncologic patients. Although GBCAs are usually well tolerated, severe and life-threatening allergic reactions might occur, which can result in overly cautions adherence to special precautions in patients.

Purpose

To evaluate the management of the reported GBCA-associated adverse reactions in subsequent contrast-enhanced MRIs in pediatric patients, distinguishing non-allergic and allergic reactions.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, consecutive pediatric neurooncological patients who underwent GBCA-enhanced MRI at our university hospital, between 2007 and 2016, were eligible. The patients’ history was evaluated with regard to any adverse events after GBCA administration. In a subset of patients with reported adverse reactions, the institutional premedication regime or an allergy work-up in clinical practice were performed, using either skin-prick tests or intravenous provocation tests in a double-blind procedure.

Results

Included were 8156 contrast-enhanced MRI scans in 2109 patients. Nineteen acute adverse events (19/8156; 0.23%) in 17 patients (17/2109; 0.81%) were reported. Despite a premedication regime in 14 patients, three patients (3/14; 21.4%) reported a breakthrough reaction. None of the 12 patients who underwent skin-prick tests or intravenous provocation tests showed allergic reactions. At least one well-tolerated GBCA was identified in almost every tested patient.

Conclusion

A fast-track allergy work-up can help to distinguish non-allergic and allergic reactions and to identify a well-tolerated GBCA, thus avoiding unnecessary premedication for subsequent GBCA administrations.