Search

Background: Oral contrast preparation is fundamental to ensuring diagnostic examination quality for magnetic resonance enterography (MRE), yet little is known about the relative palatability and tolerability of various oral contrast agents in pediatric patients with known or suspected inflammatory bowel disease., Objective: We prospectively compared three MRE oral preparations in pediatric patients with known or suspected Crohn disease with respect to patient-reported tolerability and radiologist-determined small-bowel distension and opacification., Materials and Methods: Seventy-five pediatric patients (mean age 14.8 years, 55% female) with known or suspected Crohn disease referred for MRE were randomized to an oral preparation with a sugar alcohol-based flavored beverage (Breeza), polyethylene glycol preparation (MiraLAX), or low-concentration barium sulfate suspension (VoLumen). Patients were instructed to consume oral contrast agent (using a weight-based protocol) beginning 60 min prior to MRE imaging. Following MRE, patients completed a questionnaire regarding their oral preparation solution including: taste (1-5 scale), feeling of well-being (1-5 scale) and willingness to consume again (yes/no). Two radiologists reviewed all MRE exams and rated exams for global features (active disease, overall small-bowel distention [1-4 scale]) and features specific to individual small-bowel segments (extent of distention, maximal luminal diameter, opacification, and susceptibility artifact). Statistical methods included one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey honest difference and Fisher exact tests., Results: The overall rate of completion of the entire prescribed contrast volume was 53% (40/75), with a significantly higher rate of completion for MiraLAX than for VoLumen (70% vs. 30%, P=0.007). Crossover to a different preparation occurred in nine patients (12%) and was significantly more frequent when the initial preparation was VoLumen versus MiraLAX (29% vs. 0%, P=0.005). Mean subjective taste ratings for both MiraLAX (3.4, P<0.0001) and Breeza (2.8, P=0.006) were superior to those of VoLumen (1.9), which persisted in the subset of patients with MRE evidence of active Crohn disease. Patients who consumed MiraLAX were more likely to be willing to drink it again compared to those consuming VoLumen (82% vs. 46%, P=0.009). Overall small-bowel distention and bowel-segment-specific metrics (distention, maximal diameter, opacification and susceptibility) did not significantly differ among groups., Conclusion: In pediatric patients with known or suspected Crohn disease, MiraLAX and Breeza were rated as more palatable than VoLumen, and all three preparations achieved a similar degree of small-bowel distension and opacification on MRE. Imaging centers performing MRE should stock multiple oral contrast preparations because a sizable proportion of children require more than one agent to ingest the requisite oral contrast volume.

Purpose: Determine the incidence, management, and impact on patient disposition of allergic-like contrast reactions (ALCR) to intravenous iodinated contrast in the emergency department (ED)., Methods: All ED patients who developed an ALCR following contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) from June 2011-December 2016 were retrospectively identified. Medical records were reviewed and reaction severity, management, and disposition were quantified using descriptive statistics. The total number of consecutive CECTs performed in the ED were available from June 2011-March 2016 and were used to derive ALCR incidence over that time period., Results: A total of 90 patients developed an ALCR during the study period. An ALCR incidence of 0.2% was derived based on 74 ALCRs occurring out of 47,059 consecutive contrast injections in ED patients from June 2011-April 2016. Reaction severity was mild in 63/90 (70%) and moderate in 27/90 (30%) cases; no patient developed a severe reaction by American College of Radiology criteria. The most commonly administered treatments were diphenhydramine in 67/90 (74%), corticosteroid in 24/90 (27%), and epinephrine in 13/90 (14%); symptoms subsequently resolved in all cases. No patient required inpatient admission for contrast reaction alone, and 5 patients were sent to the ED observation unit for post-epinephrine monitoring and subsequently discharged., Conclusion: ALCR among ED patients undergoing CECT are rare, generally of mild severity, respond well to pharmacologic management, and do not alter patient disposition in most cases. Familiarity with symptoms, management, and prevention strategies is increasingly relevant to the emergency physician given the ubiquity of CECT., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To characterize the management, outcomes, and emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS) following iodinated contrast media extravasation events in the ED., Methods: All ED patients who developed iodinated contrast media extravasation following contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) from October 2007-December 2016 were retrospectively identified. Medical records were reviewed and management, complications, frequency of surgical consultation, and ED LOS were quantified using descriptive statistics. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare ED LOS in patients who did and did not receive surgical consultation., Results: A total of 199 contrast extravasation episodes occurred in ED patients during the 9-year study period. Of these, 42 patients underwent surgical consultation to evaluate the contrast extravasation event. No patient developed progressive symptoms, compartment syndrome, or tissue necrosis, and none received treatment beyond supportive care (warm/cold packs, elevation, compression). Median ED LOS for patients who did and did not receive surgical consultation was 11.3h versus 9.0h, respectively (p<0.01)., Conclusion: Close observation and supportive care are sufficient for contrast extravasation events in the ED without concerning symptoms (progressive pain/swelling, altered tissue perfusion, sensory changes, or blistering/ulceration). Routine surgical consultation is likely unnecessary in the absence of these symptoms - concordant with the current American College of Radiology guidelines - and may be associated with longer ED LOS without impacting management., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)