Skip to main content
Log in

The Clinical Application of Radiopharmaceuticals

  • Practical Therapeutic
  • Published:
Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

This article highlights the choices and the arguments in the selection of appropriate contrast materials in radiological examinations — nonionic versus ionic contrast material- and aims to assist the physician in decision-making.

Various authors have raised questions concerning the proposed advantages of nonionic contrast material. However, studies in low risk patients have shown more complications with the use of ionic contrast than nonionic contrast materials; this is the important group of patients since in high risk patients nonionics are used almost exclusively.

The important factor that increases the controversy is cost, which is significant since nonionic agents cost 10 to 15 times more than ionic agents in the USA. Thus, cost-benefit considerations are important because price sensitivity and cost may determine fund availability for equipment or materials that also may be necessary or important in improving patient care.

In magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as in computed tomography (CT), the use of contrast material has improved diagnostic accuracy and the ability to reveal lesions not otherwise easily detected in brain and spinal cord imaging. These include separating scar from disc, meningitis, meningeal spread of tumour, tumour seeding, small metastases, intracanalicular tumours, separating major mass from oedema, determining bulk tumour size and ability to demonstrate blood vessels so dynamic circulatory changes may be revealed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Almen T. Contrast agent design: some aspects on the synthesis of water soluble contrast agents of low osmolality. Journal of Theoretical Biology 24: 216–226, 1969

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ansell G. Adverse reactions to contrast agents: scope of problems. Investigative Radiology 5: 374–384, 1970

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brasch RC. Work in progress; methods of contrast enhancements for MR imaging and potential applications, a subject review. Radiology 147: 781–788, 1983

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brasch RC. Decisions about radiographic and MRI contrast media. Proceedings of the 74th annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, Chicago, course no. 607, November 1988

  • Dawson P. Chemotoxicity of contrast media and clinical adverse effects: a review. Investigative Radiology 20: 584–591, 1985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson P, Edgerton D. Contrast media and enzyme inhibition: I. cholinesterase. British Journal of Radiology 56: 653–656, 1983

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Elkin CM, Le Van AT, Leeds NE. Tolerance of iohexol, iopamidol and metrizamide in lumbar myelography. Surgical Neurology 26: 542–546, 1986

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher HW. Catalog of intravascular contrast media. Radiology 159: 561–563, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell MJ, Dawson P. Contrast agents and enzyme inhibition: II. mechanisms. British Journal of Radiology 58: 845–848, 1985

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ing JJ, Smith DC, Bull BS. Differing mechanisms of clotting inhibition by ionic and nonionic contrast agents. Radiology 172: 345–347, 1989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson TJ, Rosenquist J. The introduction of low-osmolar contrast agents in radiology; medical economic legal and public policy issues. Journal of the American Medical Association 260: 1586–1592, 1988

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ayama H, Kozuka T, Takashima T, Matsuura K, Yamaguchi K. Adverse reactions to contrast media: high-osmolality versus low-osmolality media. A scientific exhibit presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, November 1988

  • Kilgore DP, Breger RK, Daniels DL, et al. Cranial tissue, normal MR appearance after intravenous injection of GD-DTPA. Radiology 160: 757–761, 1986

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kinnison ML, Powe NR, Steinberg EP. Results of randomized control trials of low versus high osmolality contrast agents. Radiology 170: 381–389, 1989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lasser EC. Etiology of anaphylactoid responses: the promise of non-ionics. Investigative Radiology 1: 579–583, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasser EC, Berry CC. Commentary: nonionic vs ionic contrast media. What does the data tell us? American Journal of Roentgenology 152: 945–946, 1989

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mattrey RE. Perfluorooctylbromide: a new contrast agent for CT, sonography, and MR imaging. American Journal of Roentgenology 152: 247, 1989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McClennan BL. Low-osmolality contrast media, premises and promises. Radiology 162: 1–8, 1987

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer FJ. The RACR survey of intravenous contrast media reactions: a preliminary report. Australasian Radiology 32: 8–11, 1988

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Powe NR, Steinberg EP, Erickson JE, Moore BD, Smith CR, et al. Contrast medium-induced reactions: economic outcome. Radiology 169: 163–168, 1988

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ross JS, Delamarter H, Alfidi MG, et al. Gadolinium-DTPA enhanced MR imaging of the post-operative lumbar spine: time course and mechanism of enhancement. American Journal of Neuroradiology 10: 37–46, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  • Runge VM, Clanton JA, Lukehart KM, et al. Paramagnetic agents for contrast; enhanced NMR imaging, a review. American Journal of Roentgenology 141: 1209–1215, 1983

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Russell EJ, Geremia GK, Johnson CE, Huckman MS, Ramsey RG, et al. Multiple cerebral metastases: detectability with Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 165: 609–617, 1987

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Russell EJ, Schaible TF, Dillon W, et al. Multicenter double-blind placebo controlled study of gadopenetate meglumine as an MR contrast agent: evaluation in patients with cerebral lesions. American Journal of Neuroradiology 10: 53–63, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg EP, Anderson GF, Powe NR, Sakin JW, Kinnison ML, et al. Use of low-osmolality contrast media in a price-sensitive environment. American Journal of Roentgenology 151: 271–274, 1988

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sze G, Abramson A, Krol G. Gadolinium-DTPA in the evaluation of intradural extramedullary spinal disease. American Journal of Neuroradiology 9: 153–163, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  • Sze G, Shin J, Krol G. Intraparenchymal brain métastases: MR imaging versus contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology 168: 187–194, 1988

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • G, Shin J, Krol G. Temporal and quantitative enhancement of gadolinium-DTPA in spinal tumors: proceedings of the 7th annual meeting of the Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, San Francisco, p. 9, 1988

  • Weinmann HJ, Brasch RC, Press WR, Wesbey GE. Characteristics of gadolinium-DTPA complex: a potential NMR contrast agent. American Journal of Roentgenology 142: 619–624, 1984

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • White RI, Halden Jr WJ. Liquid gold: low-osmolality contrast media. Radiology 159: 559–560, 1986

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Witwer G, Cacayorin ED, Bernstein AD, Hubballah MY, Yuan HA, et al. Iopamidol and metrizamide for myelography: prospective double blind clinical trial. American Journal of Roentgenology 143: 869–873, 1984

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf GL. Current status of MR imaging agents: special report. Radiology 170: 311, 1989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf GL, Arenson RL, Cross AP. A prospective trial of ionic vs nonionic contrast agents in routine clinical practice: comparison of adverse effects. American Journal of Roentgenology 152: 939–944, 1989

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leeds, N.E. The Clinical Application of Radiopharmaceuticals. Drugs 40, 713–721 (1990). https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-199040050-00006

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-199040050-00006

Keywords

Navigation