Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31596128›Full record

ArticleDento maxillo facial radiology2020

Can the lower rate of CT- or MRI-related adverse drug reactions to contrast media due to stricter limitations on patients undergoing contrast-enhanced CT or MRI?

Takahiro Maeda, Masafumi Oda, Shinji Kito, Tatsurou Tanaka, Nao Wakasugi-Sato, Shinobu Matsumoto-Takeda, Takaaki Joujima, Yuichi Miyamura, Koichi Kiyota, Kensuke Tsutsumi and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Application report of automatic unlocking baseplate in radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Takahiro MaedaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Masafumi OdaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4330-2984
Shinji KitoDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Meikai University, Saitama, Japan.
Tatsurou TanakaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Nao Wakasugi-SatoDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Shinobu Matsumoto-TakedaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Takaaki JoujimaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Yuichi MiyamuraDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Koichi KiyotaDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Kensuke TsutsumiDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Yasuhiro MorimotoDivision of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Kyushu Dental University, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Kyushu Dental University · JPMeikai University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine whether a decreased occurrence rate of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to contrast media in contrast-enhanced CT and MRI was attributable to appropriate criteria for patients with some diseases. A secondary aim was to elucidate safety profiles for contrast media and factors influencing the occurrence of ADRs.

methodsClinical data of patients who underwent contrast-enhanced CT (5576 cases) or MRI (3357 cases) were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate rates of ADRs to contrast media, symptoms of ADRs, treatments for ADRs, and differences in medical history, blood test results, and other factors between patients with and without ADRs in a dental hospital.

resultsThe rate of ADRs to contrast media was 0.54% for CT and 0.09% for MRI. The most frequent ADRs in contrast-enhanced CT or MRI were nausea and vomiting as physiologic reactions. Two serious reactions were seen for CT, but none for MRI. Significant differences between patients with and without ADRs were seen in liver function according to blood tests for CT, and in digestive disorders elicited from medical interviews for MRI.

conclusionThe lower occurrence rate of ADRs to contrast media in dental hospitals could be due to the adoption of appropriate criteria for patients with some diseases undergoing enhanced CT or MRI. Complete suppression of ADRs to contrast media for CT or MRI is unrealistic, so attention is warranted for patients with decreased liver function when performing enhanced CT, and for patients with digestive disorders when performing enhanced MRI.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPatient SelectionRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedContrast MediaAdverse Drug ReactionContrast MediaHospital Dental ServiceMagnetic Resonance ImagingX-Ray Computed Tomography

Identifiers

PMID31596128
PMCPMC7026927
OpenAlexW2979586937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.