SynthesisPediatric radiology2024
CT contrast extravasation in children: a single-center experience and systematic review.
Synthesis in Pediatric radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- PERC-Peds rule for bedside exclusion of pulmonary embolism without radiation in children in the USA (BEEPER): a multicentre, prospective, observational, diagnostic accuracy study.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2026Observational
- A comparison of magnetocardiography with noninvasive cardiac testing in the evaluation of patients with chest pain.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Thoracic CT Angiographies in Children Using Automated Power Injection with Bolus Tracking Versus Manual Contrast Injection: Analysis of Contrast Enhancement, Image Quality and Radiation Exposure.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExtravasation of iodinated contrast material during computed tomography (CT) is a rare complication. A few patients may develop severe complications such as compartment syndrome.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to retrospectively assess the prevalence, severity, management, and outcome of contrast extravasations in our institution and to perform a comparison to what has been reported in the existing literature. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a research ethics board (REB)-approved retrospective study comprising 11 patients who had intravenous contrast-enhanced CT between 2019 and 2022 in a tertiary pediatric center, and experienced extravasation of iodinated contrast as a complication. Age, weight, sex, co-morbidities, angiocatheter size, venous access location, total contrast volume, flow rate, patient's symptoms, severity of injury, and management were collected. For the systematic review, PRISMA guidelines were followed.
resultsOnly 11 (0.3%) (0.17-0.54 (95%CI)) contrast extravasations occurred in a total of 3638 CTs performed with intravenous contrast during the same period in children. The median age (IQR) was 12.5 (10.0, 15.0) years. In our cohort, 1/11 patients developed compartment syndrome and required fasciotomy. The systematic review assessed 12 articles representing a population of 110 children with extravasations. Pooled prevalence from articles stratified by age was 0.32% (0.06-0.58% (95%CI)). Only three children experienced moderate to severe complications.
conclusionsWe confirm that severe complications of contrast extravasation are rare and can occur at any age. No strong associations were seen with the need for surgical consultation (including age, sex, weight, flow rate, injection site, catheter size, and type of contrast).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.