Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Smith, J. A.

Radiology, Vol 191, 793-794, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Intravenous use of ionic and nonionic contrast agents in children

MD Cohen and JA Smith
Department of Radiology, Riley Hospital for Children, Indiana University Medical Center, Indiapolis 46202-5200.

PURPOSE: To determine the use of intravenous ionic and nonionic contrast agents in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The director of pediatric radiology at 59 of 65 large children's hospitals in North America responded to a questionnaire. RESULTS: Thirty-nine institutions used only nonionic contrast agents, one used only ionic, and 19 used both. Among those who used both, various criteria were used for selection of nonionic contrast agents. These criteria were rigidly enforced in only five of 18 institutions. The most common indication for the use of nonionic contrast agents was a severe reaction to any contrast agent, allergy, or poor renal function. Because nonionic contrast agents are more expensive, 18 of 58 directors of pediatric radiology were under pressure from hospital administrators to decrease use of these agents. The use of nonionic agents was justified because patients experienced fewer minor reactions to the agent. CONCLUSION: Most pediatric institutions are nonionic contrast agents, but many still use ionic agents for intravenous administration for selected indications.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
A. M. Gaca, D. P. Frush, S. M. Hohenhaus, X. Luo, A. Ancarana, A. Pickles, and K. S. Frush
Enhancing Pediatric Safety: Using Simulation to Assess Radiology Resident Preparedness for Anaphylaxis from Intravenous Contrast Media
Radiology, October 1, 2007; 245(1): 236 - 244.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. R. Dillman, P. J. Strouse, J. H. Ellis, R. H. Cohan, and S. C. Jan
Incidence and Severity of Acute Allergic-Like Reactions to IV Nonionic Iodinated Contrast Material in Children
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2007; 188(6): 1643 - 1647.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.