Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2017
Safety of Sulfur Hexafluoride Microbubbles in Sonography of Abdominal and Superficial Organs: Retrospective Analysis of 30,222 Cases.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tang Chunlin, Fang Kejing, Guo Yanli, Li Rui, Fan Xiaozhou, Chen Ping, Chen Zhaohui, Liu Qiangwei, Zou Ye
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety of the sulfur hexafluoride microbubble contrast agent SonoVue (Bracco SpA, Milan, Italy) and to implement precautions with the intent of further improving the safety of this contrast agent.
METHODS: A total of 30,222 patients undergoing contrast-enhanced sonography of abdominal and superficial organs in our hospital from January 2005 to December 2014 were retrospectively investigated. SonoVue was used as the ultrasound contrast agent. The symptoms and treatments of adverse reactions occurring during the contrast-enhanced sonographic examinations were reviewed and analyzed.
RESULTS: No patient died as a result of any adverse reaction. Six patients (0.020%) had adverse reactions of varying degrees, including 2 patients (0.007%) who had signs of early anaphylactic shock (chest tightness, palpitations, sweating, and rapid and weak pulse, followed by cyanosis, a disappearing pulse, and a drop in blood pressure) that improved after active rescue. The remaining 4 patients developed the following: redness and a rash on the arm above the injection site, nasal bleeding and nausea, nausea and vomiting, and back pain with numbness of the lips and limbs. Symptoms in these 4 patients self-resolved after a period of rest.
CONCLUSIONS: Contrast-enhanced sonography with sulfur hexafluoride microbubbles had good clinical safety, but rare adverse reactions were observed. A comprehensive emergency plan and rescue measures for adverse reactions should be prepared and made available to minimize the occurrence of negative clinical outcomes.
METHODS: A total of 30,222 patients undergoing contrast-enhanced sonography of abdominal and superficial organs in our hospital from January 2005 to December 2014 were retrospectively investigated. SonoVue was used as the ultrasound contrast agent. The symptoms and treatments of adverse reactions occurring during the contrast-enhanced sonographic examinations were reviewed and analyzed.
RESULTS: No patient died as a result of any adverse reaction. Six patients (0.020%) had adverse reactions of varying degrees, including 2 patients (0.007%) who had signs of early anaphylactic shock (chest tightness, palpitations, sweating, and rapid and weak pulse, followed by cyanosis, a disappearing pulse, and a drop in blood pressure) that improved after active rescue. The remaining 4 patients developed the following: redness and a rash on the arm above the injection site, nasal bleeding and nausea, nausea and vomiting, and back pain with numbness of the lips and limbs. Symptoms in these 4 patients self-resolved after a period of rest.
CONCLUSIONS: Contrast-enhanced sonography with sulfur hexafluoride microbubbles had good clinical safety, but rare adverse reactions were observed. A comprehensive emergency plan and rescue measures for adverse reactions should be prepared and made available to minimize the occurrence of negative clinical outcomes.