RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Iodinated and gadolinium-based contrast media (ICM; GBCM) induce immediate hypersensitivity (IH) reactions. Differentiating allergic from non-allergic IH is crucial; allergy contraindicates the culprit agent for life. We studied frequency of allergic IH among ICM or GBCM reactors. METHODS: Patients were recruited in 31 hospitals between 2005 and 2009. Clinical symptoms, plasma histamine and tryptase concentrations and skin tests were recorded. Allergic IH was diagnosed by intradermal tests (IDT) with the culprit CM diluted 1:10, "potentially allergic" IH by positive IDT with pure CM, and non-allergic IH by negative IDT. FINDINGS: Among 245 skin-tested patients (ICMâ¯=â¯209; GBCMâ¯=â¯36), allergic IH to ICM was identified in 41 (19.6%) and to GBCM in 10 (27.8%). Skin cross-reactivity was observed in 11 patients with ICM (26.8%) and 5 with GBCM (50%). Allergy frequency increased with clinical severity and histamine and tryptase concentrations (pâ¯<â¯0.0001). Cardiovascular signs were strongly associated with allergy. Non-allergic IH was observed in 152 patients (62%) (ICM:134; GBCM:18). Severity grade was lower (pâ¯<â¯0.0001) and reaction delay longer (11.6 vs 5.6â¯min; pâ¯<â¯0.001). Potentially allergic IH was diagnosed in 42 patients (17.1%) (ICM:34; GBCM:8). The delay, severity grade, and mediator release were intermediate between the two other groups. INTERPRETATION: Allergic IH accounted for < 10% of cutaneous reactions, and > 50% of life-threatening ones. GBCM and ICM triggered comparable IH reactions in frequency and severity. Cross-reactivity was frequent, especially for GBCM. We propose considering skin testing with pure contrast agent, as it is more sensitive than the usual 1:10 dilution criteria.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the pathomechanisms involved in cases of immediate hypersensitivity reactions occurring after the administration of iodinated contrast media. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients having presented clinical signs of immediate hypersensitivity suggesting allergy after iodinated contrast medium were investigated. Histamine and tryptase concentrations were measured, and/or skin tests were performed. Patients with positive skin tests to the culprit contrast agent were classified as IgE-mediated allergic hypersensitivity (Group I) and patients with negative skin tests as non-allergic hypersensitivity (Group II). RESULTS: 38 patients were included. Most reactions appeared after non-ionic (n = 32). Reactions were more frequently severe following ionic than non-ionic (p = 0.014). Skin testing was not performed in 11 patients. Skin tests with the culprit contrast agent were negative in 26% of the patients (Group II, n = 7) whereas they were found positive with the contrast agent in 73% of the patients (Group I, n = 19). Latex-induced reaction was diagnosed in one patient, and was consequently excluded from the cohort. In Group I, the frequency of cross-reactivity with the other commercialized iodinated contrast media was low (7%). Cardiovascular signs were present in Group I (52.6%, n = 10), and absent in Group II (p = 0.023). Histamine and tryptase concentrations were higher in patients who had cardiovascular signs (p < 0.02). CONCLUSION: Immediate reactions with clinical signs suggesting allergy along with positive skin tests with the administered contrast agent confirm immediate allergic hypersensitivity (anaphylaxis) to this agent. Consequently, the culprit contrast agent should be definitely avoided as well as cross-reactive ICM in order to prevent further recurrences.