Literature DB >> 20981503

Off-label use of intravascular iodinated organic and MR contrast media.

O Tamburrini1, I Aprile, C Falcone, D Console, A Rotundo, A Rotondo.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This paper analyses off-label prescribing of the iodinated organic and magnetic resonance (MR) contrast media used in diagnostic imaging and evaluates the liability profiles and medicolegal issues associated with such use. The term off-label generally indicates the use of known drugs for which new scientific evidence suggests use in a manner and in clinical scenarios not explicitly addressed by the drug data sheet and is outside the indications for which the medication was approved. In addition, the term also indicates the use of drugs with a different route of administration and dosage from those indicated in the information leaflet. Intravascular contrast media used in diagnostic imaging are drugs in the complete sense of the term, even though they have unique characteristics which in many ways distinguish them from other pharmacological agents. The off-label use of contrast media in diagnostic imaging is a little-investigated field and most commonly, but not exclusively, applies to gadolinium-based contrast media used in MR angiography as well as cardiac and paediatric applications. In particular, the off-label use of contrast media mostly concerns deviations from the recommended dose. As contrast media are to all effects pharmaceutical agents, their off-label use can be considered admissible within the limitations laid down by the Italian law in force (Article 3 of Law 94/98) and its interpretation, i.e. the following criteria must be present: the lack of a valid diagnostic alternative; written informed consent by the patient; the presence of scientific publications validated at the international level; assumption of responsibility by the radiologist.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of contrast media in modern image-guided medicine is essential. In cases in which the information contained in the information leaflet is modified and updated in any way whatsoever (indications, dosage, at others), specifically if restrictions are introduced in accordance with the law in force, the pharmaceutical industry must provide formal and timely notification to radiologists. On their part as prescribers and users of contrast media, radiologists must remain up to date regarding any changes in indications, dosage and route of administration. Lastly, we propose that the radiology report includes not only the type but also the dose of contrast medium used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20981503     DOI: 10.1007/s11547-010-0601-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Med        ISSN: 0033-8362            Impact factor:   3.469


  20 in total

1.  Is nephrogenic systemic fibrosis linked to the introduction of contrast-enhanced MR angiography?

Authors:  Johannes Gossner
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Which study when? Iodinated contrast-enhanced CT versus gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Robert A Halvorsen
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  [Contrast-induced acute renal failure].

Authors:  M Giannattasio
Journal:  G Ital Nefrol       Date:  2005 May-Jun

4.  Safety and effectiveness of gadolinium-enhanced multi-detector row spiral CT angiography of the chest: preliminary results in 37 patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast agents.

Authors:  Martine Remy-Jardin; Philippe Dequiedt; Olivier Ertzbischoff; Isabelle Tillie-Leblond; John Bruzzi; Alain Duhamel; Jacques Remy
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-04-21       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 5.  Contrast-induced nephropathy.

Authors:  Peter A McCullough; Sandeep S Soman
Journal:  Crit Care Clin       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.598

Review 6.  Contrast-induced acute kidney injury: specialty-specific protocols for interventional radiology, diagnostic computed tomography radiology, and interventional cardiology.

Authors:  Stanley Goldfarb; Peter A McCullough; John McDermott; Spencer B Gay
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 7.616

7.  Renal artery stenosis: comparative evaluation of gadolinium-enhanced MRA and DSA.

Authors:  F Stacul; S Gava; M Belgrano; S Cernic; L Pagnan; F Pozzi Mucelli; M A Cova
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2008-05-15       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Imaging patients with chronic kidney disease: CIN or NSF?

Authors:  H S Thomsen
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2007-07-24       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  Incidence and outcomes of contrast-induced AKI following computed tomography.

Authors:  Steven D Weisbord; Maria K Mor; Abby L Resnick; Kathryn C Hartwig; Paul M Palevsky; Michael J Fine
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2008-05-07       Impact factor: 8.237

10.  Gadolinium-containing contrast media for radiographic examinations: a position paper.

Authors:  Henrik S Thomsen; Torsten Almèn; Sameh K Morcos
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-08-16       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Gadolinium and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: have the alarm bells been silenced?

Authors:  O Tamburrini; A Balducci
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Ultrasound contrast media in paediatric patients: is it an off-label use? Regulatory requirements and radiologist's liability.

Authors:  F Esposito; M Di Serafino; P Sgambati; F Mercogliano; L Tarantino; G Vallone; P Oresta
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 3.  Use of contrast media in diagnostic imaging: medico-legal considerations.

Authors:  C Pomara; N Pascale; F Maglietta; M Neri; I Riezzo; E Turillazzi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-06-17       Impact factor: 3.469

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.