Skip Navigation

European Journal of Echocardiography 2005 6(5):363-366; doi:10.1016/j.euje.2005.02.003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dijkmans, P.A.
Right arrow Articles by Kamp, O.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dijkmans, P.A.
Right arrow Articles by Kamp, O.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © 2005, The European Society of Cardiology

Adverse reactions to ultrasound contrast agents: Is the risk worth the benefit?

P.A. Dijkmans*, C.A. Visser and O. Kamp

VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Received 2 November 2004; accepted after revision 12 February 2005.

pa.dijkmans{at}vumc.nl

* Corresponding author. Department of Cardiology 6N-120, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 (0) 20 4442244; fax: +31 (0) 20 4442446.


  Abstract

The introduction of ultrasound contrast agents has led to a marked improvement in diagnostic capabilities in echocardiography. As no serious adverse events were seen during the preclinical development phase, ultrasound contrast agents were thought to be safe. Recently, three fatal and 19 severe, non-fatal adverse reactions were reported in a post marketing analysis of more than 150,000 studies of Sonovue®, which has led to the addition of several contra-indications for the use of this ultrasound contrast agent. Although a strong relationship was established between the non-fatal cases and administration of Sonovue, a causal relationship between the fatal cases and the use of Sonovue is debatable. Therefore, the risk associated with the use of this ultrasound contrast agent should be judged carefully, taking into consideration the prevalence of adverse effects of other contrast media and diagnostic procedures used in cardiology.

Keywords: Echocardiography; Ultrasound contrast agents; Safety


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur J EchocardiogrHome page
A. Ionescu
Bubble trouble: anaphylactic shock, threatened myocardial infarction, and transient renal failure after intravenous echo contrast for left ventricular cavity opacification preceding dobutamine stress echo
Eur J Echocardiogr, July 1, 2009; 10(5): 707 - 710.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Heart JHome page
G. Van Camp, S. Droogmans, and B. Cosyns
Bio-effects of ultrasound contrast agents in daily clinical practice: fact or fiction?
Eur. Heart J., May 2, 2007; 28(10): 1190 - 1192.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Am Coll CardiolHome page
P. A. Dijkmans, R. Senior, H. Becher, T. R. Porter, K. Wei, C. A. Visser, and O. Kamp
Myocardial Contrast Echocardiography Evolving as a Clinically Feasible Technique for Accurate, Rapid, and Safe Assessment of Myocardial Perfusion: The Evidence So Far
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 5, 2006; 48(11): 2168 - 2177.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.