Incidence of Severe Adverse Drug Reactions to Ultrasound Enhancement Agents in a Contemporary Echocardiography Practice

Mays T. Ali, Mark Johnson, Timothy Irwin, Sonia Henry, Lissa Sugeng, Sarita Kansal, Thomas G. Allison, Merri L. Bremer, Victoria R. Jones, Michael D. Martineau, Connie Wong, Gregory Marecki, Julie Stebbins, Hector I. Michelena, Robert B. McCully, Anna Svatikova, Ratnasari Padang, Christopher G. Scott, Mansi J. Kanuga, Reza ArsanjaniPatricia A. Pellikka, Garvan C. Kane, Jeremy J. Thaden

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: Prior data indicate a very rare risk of serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) to ultrasound enhancement agents (UEAs). We sought to evaluate the frequency of ADR to UEA administration in contemporary practice. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 4 US health systems to characterize the frequency and severity of ADR to UEA. Adverse drug reactions were considered severe when cardiopulmonary involvement was present and critical when there was loss of consciousness, loss of pulse, or ST-segment elevation. Rates of isolated back pain and headache were derived from the Mayo Clinic Rochester stress echocardiography database where systematic prospective reporting of ADR was performed. Results: Among 26,539 Definity and 11,579 Lumason administrations in the Mayo Clinic Rochester stress echocardiography database, isolated back pain or headache was more frequent with Definity (0.49% vs 0.04%, P < .0001) but less common with Definity infusion versus bolus (0.08% vs 0.53%, P = .007). Among all sites there were 201,834 Definity and 84,943 Lumason administrations. Severe and critical ADR were more frequent with Lumason than with Definity (0.0848% vs 0.0114% and 0.0330% vs 0.0010%, respectively; P < .001 for each). Among the 3 health systems with >2,000 Lumason administrations, the frequency of severe ADR with Lumason ranged from 0.0755% to 0.1093% and the frequency of critical ADR ranged from 0.0293% to 0.0525%. Severe ADR rates with Definity were stable over time but increased in more recent years with Lumason (P = .02). Patients with an ADR to Lumason since the beginning of 2021 were more likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccination compared with matched controls (88% vs 75%; P = .05) and more likely to have received Moderna than Pfizer-Biotech (71% vs 26%, P < .001). Conclusion: Severe and critical ADR, while rare, were more frequent with Lumason, and the frequency has increased in more recent years. Additional work is needed to better understand factors, including associations with recently developed mRNA vaccines, which may be contributing to the increased rates of ADR to UEA since 2021.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)276-284.e3
JournalJournal of the American Society of Echocardiography
Volume37
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2024

Keywords

  • Adverse drug reaction
  • Echocardiography
  • Imaging
  • Ultrasound enhancement agent

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Incidence of Severe Adverse Drug Reactions to Ultrasound Enhancement Agents in a Contemporary Echocardiography Practice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this