Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Recent guidelines recommend direct patient observation, pressure monitoring, and sensor devices to prevent extravasation during contrast media (CM) injection. However, it is impractical in terms of time and cost to install sensors for all patients.

Purpose

To identify risk factors for CM extravasations during contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) in a large population and to establish criteria for placing the sensor device on patients.

Material and Methods

This retrospective study included 143,556 patients who underwent CECT at our hospital between April 2012 and July 2022. We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis between patients with (n = 350) and randomly selected patients without CM extravasation (n = 350). We investigated the percentage of patients with sensor devices and their sensitivity for detecting extravasation using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

Results

The extravasation rate was 0.27%. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the injection rate (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33–1.95: P <0.001), catheter gauge (AOR = 3.86, 95% CI = 1.92–7.76; P <0.001), the use of anticancer drugs (AOR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.32–2.50; P <0.001), and existing catheters (AOR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.10–2.11; P = 0.009) were significantly associated with extravasation. To achieve a sensitivity of 90%, 80%, 70%, 60%, and 50%, 80%, 65%, 50%, 40%, and 28% of all patients required the placement of a sensor device, respectively.

Conclusion

Sensitivity analysis established criteria for effective placing sensor devices.

Keywords

Computed tomography contrast media extravasation risk factors sensor device

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bellin

Jakobsen

Tomassin

, et al. Contrast medium extravasation injury: guidelines for prevention and management. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2807–2812.

Roditi

Khan

van der Molen

, et al. Intravenous contrast medium extravasation: systematic review and updated ESUR Contrast Media Safety Committee guidelines. Eur Radiol 2022;32:3056–3066.

Heshmatzadeh Behzadi

Farooq

Newhouse

, et al. MRI and CT contrast media extravasation: a systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97:e0055.

van der Molen

Reimer

Dekkers

, et al. Post-contrast acute kidney injury – part 1: definition, clinical features, incidence, role of contrast medium and risk factors: recommendations for updated ESUR Contrast Medium Safety Committee guidelines. Eur Radiol 2018;28:2845–2855.

van der Molen

Reimer

Dekkers

, et al. Post-contrast acute kidney injury. Part 2: risk stratification, role of hydration and other prophylactic measures, patients taking metformin and chronic dialysis patients: recommendations for updated ESUR Contrast Medium Safety Committee guidelines. Eur Radiol 2018;28:2856–2869.

Belzunegui

Louis

Torrededia

, et al. Extravasation of radiographic contrast material and compartment syndrome in the hand: a case report. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2011;19:9.

Vandeweyer

Heymans

Deraemaecker

. Extravasation injuries and emergency suction as treatment. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105:109–110.

Davenport

Wang

Bashir

, et al. Rate of contrast material extravasations and allergic-like reactions: effect of extrinsic warming of low-osmolality iodinated CT contrast material to 37 degrees C. Radiology 2012;262:475–484.

Hwang

Shin

Choi

, et al. Frequency, outcome, and risk factors of contrast media extravasation in 142,651 intravenous contrast-enhanced CT scans. Eur Radiol 2018;28:5368–5375.

10.

Tay

Chang

, et al. Large-volume iodinated contrast medium extravasation: low frequency and good outcome after conservative management in a single-centre cohort of more than 67,000 patients. Eur Radiol 2018;28:5376–5383.

11.

Birnbaum

Nelson

Chezmar

, et al. Extravasation detection accessory: clinical evaluation in 500 patients. Radiology 1999;212:431–438.

12.

Rupp

Ferre

Boyd

, et al. Extravasation risk using ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheters for computed tomography contrast administration. Acad Emerg Med 2016;23:918–921.

13.

Isojima

Kato

Ito

, et al. Growth standard charts for Japanese children with mean and standard deviation (SD) values based on the year 2000 national survey. Clin Pediatr Endocrinol 2016;25:71–76.

14.

Matsumoto

Higaki

Masuda

, et al. Minimizing individual variations in arterial enhancement on coronary CT angiographs using “contrast enhancement optimizer”: a prospective randomized single-center study. Eur Radiol 2019;29:2998–3005.

15.

Matsumoto

Higaki

Arataki

, et al. Individual optimization of contrast media injection protocol at hepatic dynamic computed tomography using patient-specific contrast enhancement optimizer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2020;44:230–235.

16.

Moreno

Pinho

Nelson

, et al. Lessons learned from 118,970 multidetector computed tomographic intravenous contrast material administrations: impact of catheter dwell time and gauge, catheter location, rate of contrast material administration, and patient age and sex on volume of extravasate. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2013;37:286–288.

17.

Abe

Mizuno

Tani

, et al. Effectiveness of the new injection program ‘saline test injection mode’ for use power injector in pediatric contrast CT. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 2013;36:347–354.

18.

Hardie

Kereshi

. Incidence of intravenous contrast extravasation: increased risk for patients with deep brachial catheter placement from the emergency department. Emerg Radiol 2014;21:235–238.

19.

Federle

Chang

Confer

, et al. Frequency and effects of extravasation of ionic and nonionic CT contrast media during rapid bolus injection. Radiology 1998;206:637–640.

20.

Wienbeck

Fischbach

Kloska

, et al. Prospective study of access site complications of automated contrast injection with peripheral venous access in MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:825–829.

21.

Sinan

Al-Khawari

Chishti

, et al. Contrast media extravasation: manual versus power injector. Med Princ Pract 2005;14:107–110.

22.

Kodzwa

. ACR manual on contrast media: 2018 updates. Radiol Technol 2019;91:97–100.

23.

Plumb

Murphy

. The use of central venous catheters for intravenous contrast injection for CT examinations. Br J Radiol 2011;84:197–203.

24.

Buijs

Barentsz

Smits

MLJ

, et al. Systematic review of the safety and efficacy of contrast injection via venous catheters for contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Eur J Radiol Open 2017;4:118–122.

25.

Barrera

White

Shepherd

, et al. Contrast extravasation using power injectors for contrast-enhanced computed tomography in children: frequency and injury severity. Acad Radiol 2019;26:1668–1674.

26.

Dykes

Bhargavan-Chatfield

Dyer

. Intravenous contrast extravasation during CT: a national data registry and practice quality improvement initiative. J Am Coll Radiol 2015;12:183–191.

27.

Wang

Cohan

Ellis

, et al. Frequency, management, and outcome of extravasation of nonionic iodinated contrast medium in 69,657 intravenous injections. Radiology 2007;243:80–87.

28.

Niv

Costa

Kicak

, et al. Vascular extravasation of contrast medium in radiological examinations: University of California San Diego health system experience. J Patient Saf 2014;10:105–110.

29.

Shaqdan

Aran

Thrall

, et al. Incidence of contrast medium extravasation for CT and MRI in a large academic medical centre: a report on 502,391 injections. Clin Radiol 2014;69:1264–1272.

30.

Jacobs

Birnbaum

Langlotz

. Contrast media reactions and extravasation: relationship to intravenous injection rates. Radiology 1998;209:411–416.

31.

Ding

Meystre

Campeanu

, et al. Contrast media extravasations in patients undergoing computerized tomography scanning: a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors and interventions. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep 2018;16:87–116.

32.

Cohan

Dunnick

Leder

, et al. Extravasation of nonionic radiologic contrast media: efficacy of conservative treatment. Radiology 1990;176:65–67.

33.

Miles

Rasmussen

Litwiller

, et al. Safe use of an intravenous power injector for CT: experience and protocol. Radiology 1990;176:69–70.

34.

Sakellariou

Paul

, et al. Role of contrast media viscosity in altering vessel wall shear stress and relation to the risk of contrast extravasations. Med Eng Phys 2016;38:1426–1433.

35.

Schwab

Uder

Anders

, et al. Peripheral intravenous power injection of iodinated contrast media through 22G and 20G cannulas: can high flow rates be achieved safely? A clinical feasibility study. Rofo 2009;181:355–361.

36.

Callahan

Poznauskis

Zurakowski

, et al. Nonionic iodinated intravenous contrast material-related reactions: incidence in large urban children’s hospital–retrospective analysis of data in 12,494 patients. Radiology 2009;250:674–681.

37.

Awai

Hiraishi

Hori

. Effect of contrast material injection duration and rate on aortic peak time and peak enhancement at dynamic CT involving injection protocol with dose tailored to patient weight. Radiology 2004;230:142–150.

38.

Johnson

Christensen

Lai

, et al. Catheter insertion for intravenous (IV) contrast infusion in multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT): defining how catheter caliber selection affects procedure of catheter insertion, IV contrast infusion rate, complication rate, and MDCT image quality. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2014;38:281–284.

39.

Alexander

Morrison

. Power-injectable ports: safety during placement, therapeutic use, and contrast administration during computed tomography procedures. J Vasc Access 2012;13:432–437.

40.

Goltz

Machann

Noack

, et al. Feasibility of power contrast injections and bolus triggering during CT scans in oncologic patients with totally implantable venous access ports of the forearm. Acta Radiol 2011;52:41–47.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB

0.07 MB

Feasibility of preventing massive contrast media extravasation using a sensor device in contrast-enhanced CT: an observational study

Abstract

Background

Purpose

Material and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material