4.6 Review

Risks and Options With Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents in Patients With CKD: A Review

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES
Volume 77, Issue 4, Pages 517-528

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2020.07.012

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gadolinium-based contrast agents improve diagnostic capabilities of MRI, but can cause nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in severe chronic kidney disease patients. Restrictive policies and selective use of GBCAs with higher free gadolinium affinity have reduced NSF cases, yet physicians remain concerned about GBCA use in severe CKD. Recent observations of gadolinium deposition in the brain and a possible systemic syndrome attributed to GBCAs have magnified these concerns.
Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) improve the diagnostic capabilities of magnetic resonance imaging. Although initially believed to be without major adverse effects, GBCA use in patients with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) was demonstrated to cause nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF). Restrictive policies of GBCA use in CKD and selective use of GBCAs that bind free gadolinium more strongly have resulted in the virtual elimination of NSF cases. Contemporary studies of the use of GBCAs with high binding affinity for free gadolinium in severe CKD demonstrate an absence of NSF. Despite these observations and the limitations of contemporary studies, physicians remain concerned about GBCA use in severe CKD. Concerns of GBCA use in severe CKD are magnified by recent observations demonstrating gadolinium deposition in brain and a possible systemic syndrome attributed to GBCAs. Radiologic advances have resulted in several new imaging modalities that can be used in the severe CKD population and that do not require GBCA administration. In this article, we critically review GBCA use in patients with severe CKD and provide recommendations regarding GBCA use in this population.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available