Abstract
Background
Determining the safety of contrast agents is challenging. In the absence of large controlled clinical trials, non-interventional (post-marketing surveillance) studies provide an opportunity to clearly investigate the safety profile of contrast agents.
Purpose
To assess the safety profile of iopromide in contrast-enhanced X-ray in clinical practice, using pooled data from three non-interventional studies.
Material and Methods
All studies were international, multicenter, non-interventional studies examining iopromide tolerability in clinical practice. Patients received iopromide (iodine concentrations of 300 mg/mL or 370 mg/mL) via intravenous or intra-arterial administration according to the diagnostic indication and in compliance with the local package insert.
Results
In total, 132,012 patients (37 countries, >1600 centers) were included. Overall, 3823 patients (2.49%) reported an adverse drug reaction (ADR) and 1983 patients (1.50%) reported an ADR without tolerance indicators (injection site warmth, feeling hot or injection site pain, of mild intensity only). This is a similar rate to other low osmolar contrast media. In most patients, ADRs were mild (n = 2632; 1.99% of all patients) and did not require any action (n = 2799; 2.12% of all patients). ADRs were more common among women (n = 1680 [2.8%]) than men (n = 1586 [2.2%]) and among younger patients (<18 years: n = 98 [3.2%]) than older patients (18–49 years: n = 1261 [3.5%]; 50–69 years: n = 1224 [2.2%]; ≥70 years: n = 362 [1.5%]). The most common ADRs were injection site warmth/feeling hot, nausea/vomiting, and dysguesia. Forty-five serious ADRs were reported in 19 patients. ADRs were more common in at-risk patients (5.00%) than in the overall population.
Conclusion
This pooled analysis confirms the well-established good safety profile of iopromide in clinical practice in Asian and European countries and the USA.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.