HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Elicker, B. M. Articles by Weinreb, J. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Elicker, B. M. Articles by Weinreb, J. C. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

IV Contrast Administration for CT: A Survey of Practices for the Screening and Prevention of Contrast Nephropathy

¹ Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave., Rm. M-391, San Francisco, CA 94143.
² Research Department, American College of Radiology, Reston, VA.
⁴ Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

OBJECTIVE. No widely accepted practice guidelines exist for the screening and prevention of contrast nephropathy in patients receiving iodinated IV contrast agents for CT examinations. Issues include screening to identify at-risk patients, discriminatory levels of renal insufficiency beyond which IV contrast material is contraindicated, and the use of preventive measures. We surveyed radiologists to identify the current practice patterns and to determine those areas in which guidelines are most needed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Surveys were e-mailed to 2,000 radiologists. The survey included questions on the issues just described and respondent demographics.

RESULTS. The response rate was 21%. Serum creatinine is the most commonly used screening method: 92% of respondents for inpatient examinations and 66% for outpatient examinations. Only 2% use estimated creatinine clearance. The average threshold serum creatinine value used to determine that patients should not receive IV contrast material is 1.5 mg/dL in 35%, 1.7 mg/dL in 27%, and 2.0 mg/dL in 31% (mean, 1.78 mg/dL). Diabetes slightly lowers the threshold creatinine (mean, 1.68 mg/dL). Fewer than 30% of respondents frequently administer IV contrast material to patients with a renal transplant or multiple myeloma. The most commonly used preventive measures include hydration (93%), reduction of contrast dose (77%), and administration of acetylcysteine (39%). Overall, no important differences were found among practice settings or level of specialization.

CONCLUSION. A wide variation of practice patterns is apparent in the screening and prevention of contrast nephropathy. In some cases, these patterns conflict with recommendations from the literature. The results of this study identify opportunities for further research and areas in need of improved practice guidelines.

Keywords: contrast media • contrast nephropathy • CT • radiology practice • renal disease • screening

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. H. Ellis and R. H. Cohan Reducing the Risk of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: A Perspective on the Controversies Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2009; 192(6): 1544 - 1549. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. C. Weinreb Which Study When? Is Gadolinium-enhanced MR Imaging Safer than Iodine-enhanced CT? Radiology, October 1, 2008; 249(1): 3 - 8. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. R. Herts, E. Schneider, E. D. Poggio, N. A. Obuchowski, and M. E. Baker Identifying Outpatients with Renal Insufficiency before Contrast-enhanced CT by Using Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rates versus Serum Creatinine Levels Radiology, July 1, 2008; 248(1): 106 - 113. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]