Incidence of Severe Adverse Drug Reactions to Ultrasound Enhancement Agents in a Contemporary Echocardiography Practice.

OBJECTIVES: Prior data indicate a very rare risk of serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) to ultrasound enhancement agents (UEAs). We sought to evaluate the frequency of ADR to UEA administration in contemporary practice. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 4 US health systems to characterize the frequency and severity of ADR to UEA. Adverse drug reactions were considered severe when cardiopulmonary involvement was present and critical when there was loss of consciousness, loss of pulse, or ST-segment elevation. Rates of isolated back pain and headache were derived from the Mayo Clinic Rochester stress echocardiography database where systematic prospective reporting of ADR was performed. RESULTS: Among 26,539 Definity and 11,579 Lumason administrations in the Mayo Clinic Rochester stress echocardiography database, isolated back pain or headache was more frequent with Definity (0.49% vs 0.04%, P < .0001) but less common with Definity infusion versus bolus (0.08% vs 0.53%, P = .007). Among all sites there were 201,834 Definity and 84,943 Lumason administrations. Severe and critical ADR were more frequent with Lumason than with Definity (0.0848% vs 0.0114% and 0.0330% vs 0.0010%, respectively; P < .001 for each). Among the 3 health systems with >2,000 Lumason administrations, the frequency of severe ADR with Lumason ranged from 0.0755% to 0.1093% and the frequency of critical ADR ranged from 0.0293% to 0.0525%. Severe ADR rates with Definity were stable over time but increased in more recent years with Lumason (P = .02). Patients with an ADR to Lumason since the beginning of 2021 were more likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccination compared with matched controls (88% vs 75%; P = .05) and more likely to have received Moderna than Pfizer-Biotech (71% vs 26%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Severe and critical ADR, while rare, were more frequent with Lumason, and the frequency has increased in more recent years. Additional work is needed to better understand factors, including associations with recently developed mRNA vaccines, which may be contributing to the increased rates of ADR to UEA since 2021.

Rural Health Disparities in Allergy, Asthma, and Immunologic Diseases: The Current State and Future Direction for Clinical Care and Research.

Rural health disparities are well documented and continue to jeopardize the long-term health and wellness for the millions of individuals who live in rural America. The disparities observed between urban and rural residents encompass numerous morbidity and mortality measures for several chronic diseases and have been referred to as the "rural mortality penalty." Although the unmet health needs of rural communities are widely acknowledged, little is known about rural health disparities in allergies, asthma, and immunologic diseases. Furthermore, the intersection between rural health disparities and social determinants of health has not been fully explored. To achieve a more complete understanding of the factors that perpetuate rural health disparities, greater research efforts followed by improved practice and policy are needed that account for the complex social context within rural communities rather than a general comparison between urban and rural environments or focusing on biomedical factors. Moreover, research efforts must prioritize community inclusion throughout rural areas through meaningful engagement of stakeholders in both clinical care and research. In this review, we examine the scope of health disparities in the rural United States and the impact of social determinants of health. We then detail the current state of rural health disparities in the field of allergy, asthma, and immunology. To close, we offer future considerations to address knowledge gaps and unmet needs for both clinical care and research in addressing rural health disparities.