Gadolinium as a contrast agent for infusion sialograms in patients with iodine allergy

Abstract

ObjectivesTo assess the adequacy of gadolinium in sialography as an alternative contrast agent for patients with iodine allergies. To directly compare images taken with gadolinium versus iodine‐based contrast agents using the Iowa Sialography Classification System.MethodsRetrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing sialography between February 2008 and July 2022. Patients with sialograms obtained with gadolinium were identified and matched to similar sialograms obtained with iodine‐based contrast agent. Patients were matched based on duct location, duct side, and initial radiology findings. Blinded reevaluation of sialograms was performed first independently and then by consensus by two head and neck radiologists to evaluate overall image adequacy and grade using the Iowa Sialography Classification System.ResultsFour patients with six sialograms (one bilateral parotid and one parotid + submandibular) obtained with gadolinium were identified and reevaluated. Five patients with six sialograms (one bilateral parotid) obtained with iodine‐based were matched to the gadolinium sialograms. The overall adequacy of images for gadolinium sialograms was graded at an average of 4.25 (4 = good and 5 = excellent); whereas, the overall adequacy of iodine‐based sialograms was graded at an average of 5. Inter‐observer variability was observed in three sialograms obtained with gadolinium (50%), while no interobserver variability was observed in sialograms obtained with iodine‐based contrast agent.ConclusionGadolinium is an adequate alternative to use in sialography for patients with iodine allergies undergoing contemporary digital infusion sialography. Adverse reactions to iodine contrast agents are rare in sialography; however, the precautionary use of gadolinium is acceptable for the diagnostic and therapeutic benefits in sialography.Level of Evidence: IV