FDA: Agents containing gadolinium can lead to skin hardening, tissue growth
Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comU.S. warns of fatal side effect with MRI imaging drugs
Seeded on Thu Sep 9, 2010 8:51 PM EDT (msnbc.com)
- msnbc.com sites & shows:
- TODAY
- Rock Center
- Nightly News
- Meet the Press
- Dateline
- Morning Joe
- Hardball
- Ed
- Maddow
- Last Word
- msnbc tv
Leave a Comment:
I was told by an MD several years ago that diagnostic procedures can sometimes be worse than what is being diagnosed. Glad this is finally coming out.
It would be one thing if these contrast agents were being used without any sort of regulation. Currently at most Hospitals patients are screened for their kidney function to determine whether or not their kidneys are able to excrete the contrast from their bodies. Granted, there is some inherent risk to any medical procedure and one would be naive to think that there is any safe procedure in the medical world. However, I think that most critically ill patients that have had lifesaving diagnostic exams would agree that the benefit will far outweigh the risks. It is up to the doctors and the technologists to provide the best and safest exams for the patients and that is exactly what they do.
What? The FDA fails to protect the people from potentially harmful substances?
Say it ain't so.. ( / sarcasm )
Be aware that you may suffer spiking high blood pressure from this stuff until your body can clear it.
See my username?
MRI technologist.
I can tell you for certain that, at my Employer Who Shall Remain Nameless, gadolinium is wayyyy over prescribed for studies that do not warrant its use. I swear, there are ordering physicians who think that contrast is MAGIC and is going to make some pathology magically appear out of nowhere!
Fortunately, our radiologists have protocols that we use no matter what the ordering physician requests.Most involve no contrast injection.
As a technologist with 16 years' experience, I have autonomy under my radiologist to give or not give contrast, with a simple phone call to them.
Gadolinium (gad for short...) used to be considered the safest thing to give even to a patient in renal failure who could not receive iodine contrast for a CT scan. No more.
This article will be printed by me tomorrow for show and tell to our radiologist group to further solidify our standing not to use gad indiscriminately.
IMHO, gad is used far more than is needed for many studies, even cancer and tumor. Guess what? That huge tumor in your brain or spine? It is STILL going to be a huge tumor with or without an injection of contrast. "Yep. It enhanced after injection!" DUH! That discitis in your spine? My STIR sequences tell the same. It lights up like a Christmas tree. It's infection! No gad needed. No harm to your kidneys.
But that is just one tech's opinion.
Most Radiologist will embrace every app they can find for their iPhone, but can't begin to describe the difference between a gradient echo and a T1 scan. If they spent a little more time learning the technology, they might not relay on intrusive chemicals to do their job for them.
I was expecting some of the Big Pharma bogeyman or açai berry comments on this article. When I checked the FDA site, I was suprised how commonplace the MRI exam is nowadays. However, for a total of 613 adverse events out of an estimated 45 million doses from 2005-2008 for all 5 contrast agents,
(http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/CardiovascularandRenalDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM196218.pdf)
I think it's a relatively safe (perhaps at times unnecessary) procedure. I think the FDA acted in a timely and appropriate fashion to alert people to the risk. My compliments to the MRI tech who uses his professional experience and judgement while performing the procedure.
Thank you "Dr. Robert". And please see my comment below to "Mike 0" to clarify that it is not I, but the radiologist, who is actually determining the need (or lack thereof) for contrast to be administered. That is not within my scope of practice.
Dr.Robert, does this alsp pertain to the nuclear renal scans too?
I love those tests to find out if the tests they plan will be harmful, but I'd take gad ANY day over another IVP :^/
I do find it disturbing that (according to mri_virginia)a technologist can overrule an MD - not a big fan of some dude with a couple years of ITT who challenges a pediatric neurosurgeon, regardless their perceived skills
Wow. You definitely misread or misinterpreted my comments.
"...autonomy under my radiologist to give or not give contrast, with a simple phone call to them".
The "them" being the radiologist who makes the call as to whether I give a contrast injection. I just lay out the facts that the patient has no cancer or tumor history, no surgery to the area, etc. Thus no need for contrast. I am over-riding no one. Perhaps I just wasn't clear enough. My apologies. We have department protocols for a reason. If we scanned per every ordering Dr. Tom, Dick, Harry and Jane's order it would be chaos in our department.
However, the "couple years ITT" comment is not correct at all in my case. I have a 4 year degree, and also an additional year long program completed at U.Va Medical Center for MRI / CT. Add that to the 16 years of clinical skills, and being a member of the contrast task force in our hospital system, and I think that quantifies my response quite well.
And to follow my previous comments, I did print the article and show it to our Chief Neuro Radiologist today. He had not seen it. He then went to the FDA website and printed off their statement. He has already said that it appears that we will now be injecting far less patients under the more strict verbiage issued by the FDA and the "black box warning". I have already penned an email to our contrast task force leaders to see how we will address the issue now.
Thank you and have a great day.
These imaging agents and contrasts are dangerous period! I think this issue has been covered up for 2 decades by doctors, hospitals and the imaging sector overall. people are developing issues and problems they did not have prior to injection with contrast agents. These agents are causing organ growths and this may well explain the explosion in cases of many types of cancers. Millions of people have been and continue to be harmed and/or killed. Something needs to be done now!
Well, I know I'm allergic to CAT scan dye...
Have had loads of MRI's due to pitutary tumor and migraines.