Safety of cardiac angiography with conventional ionic contrast agents

Abstract

To characterize the frequency of adverse reactions to conventional ionic contrast agents, data describing the frequency of such reactions were gathered from 4,630 diagnostic cardiac angiographic procedures. The patient population had a large prevalence of severe or unstable cardiac disease (56% had New York Heart Association class III, IV or V, 12.6% had left ventricular end-diastolic pressure >25 mm Hg and 34% had 3-vessel or left main coronary artery disease). The overall minor adverse reaction rate was 14.2%. Major adverse reactions (requiring treatment) occurred in 61 (1.3%) of procedures. All adverse reactions were managed successfully and there were no deaths. Adverse reactions were more frequent in patients with higher New York Heart Association classes and with elevated left ventricular end-diastolic pressure. The adverse reaction rate was not increased in patients with more extensive coronary artery disease, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction or reduced cardiac index. The overall adverse reaction rate was probably influenced by physician behavior. Smaller volumes of contrast agent were administered to patients with more severe cardiac disease. Six percent of procedures were abbreviated either because of an adverse reaction or of concern that a reaction might occur if the procedure were continued. As a result, the diagnostic data obtained were judged to be inadequate in 0.8% of procedures. These data demonstrate that appropriate operator caution within the highly monitored environment of the cardiac catheterization laboratory allows cardiac angiography to be performed safely with conventional ionic contrast agents in most patients. Nonionic contrast agents may offer an advantage of providing greater safety and allowing a better study completion rate in patients who are severely ill and hemodynamically precarious.