BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of intravesical administration of a second-generation ultrasound (US) contrast agent for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One thousand and ten children (563 girls, 447 boys; mean age: 2.9 years, range: 15 days-17.6 years) with 2,043 pelvi-ureter-units underwent contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (ce-VUS) to rule out vesicoureteral reflux. A second-generation US contrast agent (SonoVue®, Bracco, Milan) was administered intravesically through transurethral bladder catheterization at a dose of 0.5 ml/bladder filling. Possible adverse events were monitored during the examination and followed up for 7 days after ce-VUS by phone calls. Urine analysis and culture were performed 3-5 days before ce-VUS in all children and 24-48 h in any patient who reported with adverse events. RESULTS: No case of serious adverse event was recorded. Minor events were reported in 37 children (3.66% of the study population). These included dysuria (n = 26, 2.57%), urinary retention (n = 2, 0.2%), abdominal pain (n = 2, 0.2%), anxiety (n = 1, 0.1%) and crying (n = 1, 0.1%) during micturition, blood and mucous discharge (n = 1, 0.1%), increased frequency of micturition (n = 1, 0.1%), vomiting (n = 1, 0.1%), perineal irritation (n = 1, 0.1%), and an episode of urinary tract infection 10 days after ce-VUS (n = 1, 0.1%). Of these adverse events, 91.9% were subacute in onset and 8.1% were delayed. All events were self-limited and none required hospitalization. CONCLUSION: There were no serious adverse events. Only a few minor events were reported, most likely due to the catheterization process. Thus, ce-VUS with intravesical administration of the second-generation US contrast agent (SonoVue®) for vesicoureteral reflux detection or exclusion had a favorable safety profile in our study group.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of intravesical administration of a second-generation ultrasound (US) contrast agent for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux in children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One thousand and ten children (563 girls, 447 boys; mean age: 2.9 years, range: 15 days-17.6 years) with 2,043 pelvi-ureter-units underwent contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (ce-VUS) to rule out vesicoureteral reflux. A second-generation US contrast agent (SonoVue®, Bracco, Milan) was administered intravesically through transurethral bladder catheterization at a dose of 0.5 ml/bladder filling. Possible adverse events were monitored during the examination and followed up for 7 days after ce-VUS by phone calls. Urine analysis and culture were performed 3-5 days before ce-VUS in all children and 24-48 h in any patient who reported with adverse events. RESULTS: No case of serious adverse event was recorded. Minor events were reported in 37 children (3.66% of the study population). These included dysuria (n = 26, 2.57%), urinary retention (n = 2, 0.2%), abdominal pain (n = 2, 0.2%), anxiety (n = 1, 0.1%) and crying (n = 1, 0.1%) during micturition, blood and mucous discharge (n = 1, 0.1%), increased frequency of micturition (n = 1, 0.1%), vomiting (n = 1, 0.1%), perineal irritation (n = 1, 0.1%), and an episode of urinary tract infection 10 days after ce-VUS (n = 1, 0.1%). Of these adverse events, 91.9% were subacute in onset and 8.1% were delayed. All events were self-limited and none required hospitalization. CONCLUSION: There were no serious adverse events. Only a few minor events were reported, most likely due to the catheterization process. Thus, ce-VUS with intravesical administration of the second-generation US contrast agent (SonoVue®) for vesicoureteral reflux detection or exclusion had a favorable safety profile in our study group.
Authors: M Claudon; D Cosgrove; T Albrecht; L Bolondi; M Bosio; F Calliada; J-M Correas; K Darge; C Dietrich; M D'Onofrio; D H Evans; C Filice; L Greiner; K Jäger; N de Jong; E Leen; R Lencioni; D Lindsell; A Martegani; S Meairs; C Nolsøe; F Piscaglia; P Ricci; G Seidel; B Skjoldbye; L Solbiati; L Thorelius; F Tranquart; H P Weskott; T Whittingham Journal: Ultraschall Med Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 6.548
Authors: F Piscaglia; C Nolsøe; C F Dietrich; D O Cosgrove; O H Gilja; M Bachmann Nielsen; T Albrecht; L Barozzi; M Bertolotto; O Catalano; M Claudon; D A Clevert; J M Correas; M D'Onofrio; F M Drudi; J Eyding; M Giovannini; M Hocke; A Ignee; E M Jung; A S Klauser; N Lassau; E Leen; G Mathis; A Saftoiu; G Seidel; P S Sidhu; G ter Haar; D Timmerman; H P Weskott Journal: Ultraschall Med Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 6.548
Authors: Michael Riccabona; Fred Efraim Avni; Maria Beatrice Damasio; Lil-Sofie Ording-Müller; Johan G Blickman; Kassa Darge; Maria Luisa Lobo; Frederica Papadopoulou; Pierre-Hugues Vivier; Ullrich Willi Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2012-09-22
Authors: L S Wong; K S Tse; T W Fan; K Y Kwok; T K Tsang; H S Fung; W Chan; K W Lee; M W Y Leung; N S Y Chao; K W Tang; S C H Chan Journal: Eur J Pediatr Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Aikaterini Ntoulia; Susan J Back; Sphoorti Shellikeri; Laura Poznick; Trudy Morgan; Joanne Kerwood; J Christopher Edgar; Richard D Bellah; Janet R Reid; Diego Jaramillo; Douglas A Canning; Kassa Darge Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2017-11-27
Authors: Michael R Kramer; Nishi Bhagat; Susan J Back; Laura Poznick; Flemming Forsberg; Kassa Darge; John R Eisenbrey Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2017-09-11