论文部分内容阅读
AIM To evaluate the risk profile of sulfur hexafluoride in voiding urosonography(VUS) based on a large cohort of children.METHODS Since 2011 sulfur hexafluoride(SH,SonoV ue?,Bracco,Italy) is the only ultrasound contrast available in the European Union and its use in children has not been approved.Within a 4-year-period,531 children with suspected or proven vesicoureteral reflux(f/m = 478/53; mean age 4.9 years; 1 mo-25.2 years) following parental informed consent underwent VUS with administration of 2.6 ± 1.2 mL SH in a two-center study.A standardizedtelephone survey on adverse events was conducted three days later.RESULTS No acute adverse reactions were observed.The survey revealed subacute,mostly self-limited adverse events in 4.1%(22/531).The majority of observed adverse events(17/22) was not suspected to be caused by an allergic reaction: Five were related to catheter placement,three to reactivated urinary tract infections,five were associated with perineal disinfection before voiding urosonography or perineal dermatitis and four with a common cold.In five patients(0.9%) hints to a potential allergic cause were noted: Perineal urticaria was reported in three interviews and isolated,mild fever in two.These were minor self-limited adverse events with a subacute onset and no hospital admittance was necessary.Ninety-six point two percent of the parents would prefer future VUS examinations with use of SH.CONCLUSION No severe adverse events were observed and indications of self-limited minor allergic reactions related to intravesical administration of SH were reported in less than 1%.
AIM To evaluate the risk profile of sulfur hexafluoride in voiding urosonography (VUS) based on a large cohort of children. METHODS Since 2011 sulfur hexafluoride (SH, SonoVue ?, Bracco, Italy) is the only ultrasound contrast available in the European Union and its use in children has not been approved. Whithin a 4-year-period, 531 children with suspected or proven vesicoureteral reflux (f / m = 478/53; mean age 4.9 years; 1 mo-25.2 years) following parental informed consent underwent VUS with administration of 2.6 ± 1.2 mL SH in a two-center study. A standardized telephone survey on adverse events was conducted three days later .RESULTS No acute negative reactions were observed. The survey revealed subacute, mostly self-limited adverse events in 4.1% (22/531). The majority of observed adverse events (17/22) was not suspected to be caused by allergic reaction: Five were related catheter placement, three to reactivated urinary tract infections, five were associated with perineal disinfection before voi ding urosonography or perineal dermatitis and four with a common cold.In five patients (0.9%) hints to a potential allergic cause were noted: Perineal urticaria was reported in three interviews and isolated, mild fever in two. These were minor self-limited adverse events with a subacute onset and no hospital admittance was necessary. Nexty-six point two percent of the parents would prefer the future VUS examinations with use of SH.CONCLUSION No severe adverse events were observed and indications of self-limited minor allergic reactions related to intravesical Administration of SH were reported in less than 1%.