Oral administration of a low‐cost negative contrast agent: A three‐year experience in routine practice

Ernst, Olivier; Sergent, Géraldine; L’Herminé, C

doi:10.1002/jmri.1880070308

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The multitude of contrast agents introduced are reflections of the ongoing research in the field [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]. Ideally, the agent should be well tolerated, non-toxic, inert, homogeneously distributed in the digestive tract and inexpensive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MR imaging of the small bowel with increasing concentrations of an oral osmotic agent

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to assess the quality of MR imaging and level of adverse effects with increasing concentrations of gastrografin. This is a prospective study with 24 healthy volunteers which were randomised into four groups receiving 50%, 25%, 10% and 0% gastrografin. The endpoint was bowel image quality based on distension, signal homogeneity and wall delineation evaluated by three independent radiologists, and the maximum bowel diameter at three different levels. The subjects also scored any adverse events on a 1-5 scale. The interradiologist agreement was relatively good, with kappa values varying between 0.81 and 0.41. Improved bowel distension and image quality were achieved with increasing concentrations. But significant dose-response effects were found between increasing osmolalities and the bowel diameters and also versus the score of adverse events. The most frequent adverse reactions were diarrhea, nausea and lack of palatability. There is a gradient relationship between increasing osmolality of gastrografin and improved image quality and the score of adverse effects. The optimum concentration of gastrografin is dependent of the tolerance of the adverse events.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MR imaging of the small bowel with increasing concentrations of an oral osmotic agent

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reflecting the multitude of these pathways, many substances have been evaluated for the purpose of serving as a gastrointestinal contrast agent [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. Although most of these agents were designed to be taken orally, the majority of them can also be applied rectally.…”

Section: Contrast Agents For Bowel Mrimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Barium sulfate is inexpensive and has an excellent safety profile [18] Orally as well as rectally administered barium can provide good contrast in MR imaging of the gastrointestinal tract [19,24,25,26,27,28]. The signal intensity can vary depending on the degree of dilution of barium sulfate.…”

Section: Barium Sulfatementioning

confidence: 99%

MRI of the small and large bowel

Debatin

Patak

1999

European Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Driven by the improvements in gradient technology, breathhold T1- and T2-weighted imaging of the abdominal structures has become possible. These techniques allow exploitation of the advantages inherent to the MR imaging experiment: unsurpassed soft tissue contrast and multiplanar imaging capabilities. Magnetic resonance imaging of the small and large bowel has thus moved from a hypothetical possibility to a practical reality. This manuscript describes some of the underlying fast imaging techniques for display of the small and large bowel. Furthermore, it discusses the plethora of available oral and rectal contrast agents. Finally, clinical indications for MR of the small and large bowel as well as the rectum are described in light of the available literature. Advantages and disadvantages relative to computed tomography and other imaging techniques are discussed.

show abstract

“…All previously described MR techniques, using different either positive or negative contrast agents, strive to solve these two major conditions [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. All previously described MR techniques, using different either positive or negative contrast agents, strive to solve these two major conditions [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bowel MR imaging with oral Gastrografin: an experimental study with healthy volunteers

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our objective was to evaluate Gastrografin for MR bowel imaging. Twenty-three healthy volunteers in two randomised groups received 300 or 400 ml 50% Gastrografin, drunk continuously during 2 and 3 h, respectively. Images were applied during breath-hold in three orthogonal orientations. The balanced fast-field echo (BFFE) and balanced turbo field-echo (BTFE) sequences, with acquisition times from 13 to 25 s, were used before gadolinium (Gd) DTPA implying 1-to 2-mm-thick slices locally or 6-mm-thick slices through the entire gastrointestinal tract. The Gd-enhanced images were performed using a 3D T1-weighted FFE sequence with water selective excitation (Proset). Image quality, including bowel distention, homogeneity of opacification and wall conspicuity, were evaluated by two experienced reviewers, and the adverse reactions were recorded. Very good or excellent distention, homogeneity and wall conspicuity were achieved in the central segments from the ileum to the left colon flexure in 83-96% of cases, due to the adequate contrast media supply in these regions. Distention, homogeneity and delineation were good in the central segments of the remaining bowels. Diarrhoea was a major problem affecting all participants, followed by nausea. Provided that there is modern fast sequential technology, excellent MR imaging of the bowel can be achieved by the oral administration 50% diluted Gastrografin. Further studies are needed to refine the technique and optimise the quantity and concentration of Gastrografin in order to avoid or reduce adverse reactions.

show abstract

Oral administration of a low‐cost negative contrast agent: A three‐year experience in routine practice

Cited by 7 publications

References 20 publications

MR imaging of the small bowel with increasing concentrations of an oral osmotic agent

MR imaging of the small bowel with increasing concentrations of an oral osmotic agent

MRI of the small and large bowel

Bowel MR imaging with oral Gastrografin: an experimental study with healthy volunteers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About