ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media despite drug prophylaxis-a comparative retrospective cohort study of breakthrough reactions in Bern (Switzerland) and Seoul (South Korea).
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 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.
- Machine Learning Model to Predict Iodine Contrast Media-Related Acute Adverse Reaction in Patients Without a Similar History for Enhanced CT.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Risk factor analysis of iodinated contrast medium-related hypersensitivity reactions.Insights into imaging · 2025Review
- RadioComics-Santa Claus and the breakthrough reaction.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although several studies deal with breakthrough reactions (BTRs) in patients with contrast media (CM) hypersensitivity reactions, the phenomenon is still unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to analyse in depth patients with BTR in two countries. Methods: We retrospectively analysed the electronic medical records of in- and outpatients (random sample enrolment) from two academic hospitals of tertiary care (Seoul/South Korea, with a special monitoring system exclusively for CM hypersensitivity, and Bern/Switzerland, manually operated) with respect to basic epidemiological data, number of BTRs per patient, and severity grades of severity in follow-up analyses. The study period lasted from 2013 (2000 Bern) to 2017. Results: We identified 445 BTR-patients (91.5% from Seoul) with 691 BTRs (94.5% from Seoul). Most reactions were mild, 11% moderate and 3.9% severe. In Seoul, we found patients with up to 10 BTRs, and in Bern, there were only patients with one BTR. Fatal reactions or deaths did not occur. In most cases, the severity of the BTRs and of the index reactions were identical (80.8%). Mild index reactions remained constant in 90.6%. In contrast, in moderate index reactions the severity decreased/remained identically in 86.8% and increased in 13.2%. In severe index reactions, 55.6% of BTR reactions were severe again, in 44.4% the severity decreased. In 158 BTRs (22.9%) the culprit iodinated contrast medium (ICM) of the index reaction induced the BTR. In the other 482 BTRs (69.8%) the culprit ICM was changed to another non-culprit ICM. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study on patients with BTRs, and the first study showing BTRs in two centers in two countries of two continents. The main differences between the two centers result from the different hospital size, the number of patients, and the different documentation [manual (Bern)
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.