title: [Oral administration of intravenous contrast media: a tasty alternative to conventional oral contrast media in computed tomography].
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Many patients dislike oral contrast media due to their bad taste. The aim of the present study was to identify a solution that tastes better while providing the same opacification in order to offer oncological patients an alternative to the routinely used bad tasting oral contrast media.
  
  
  METHODS
  In a single blinded, prospective clinical study, the orally administered intravenous contrast media iohexol (Omnipaque), iopromide (Ultravist), and iotrolan (Isovist) as well as the oral contrast media sodium amidotrizoate (Gastrografin) and ioxithalamate (Telebrix) were each compared to the oral contrast medium lysine amidotrizoate as the reference standard at a constant dilution. The density values of all contrast media with the same dilutions were first measured in a phantom study. The patient study included 160 patients who had undergone a prior abdominal CT scan with lysine amidotrizoate within 6 months. The patients rated their subjective taste impression on a scale of 0 (very bad) to 10 (excellent). In addition, adverse events and opacification were recorded and prices were compared.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The phantom study revealed identical density values. Patients assigned much higher taste impression scores of 8 and 7 to iohexol and iotrolan, respectively, as compared to a score of 3 for the conventional lysine amidotrizoate (p< 0.05). Iopromide and sodium amidotrizoate did not differ significantly from lysine amidotrizoate. The opacification of all contrast media and experienced adverse events did not differ significantly. Iotrolan (ca. 120 euro/100 ml), Iohexol and Iopromide (ca. 70 euro/100 ml) are more expensive than the conventional oral contrast media (ca. 10 - 20 euro/100 ml).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Orally administered solutions of non-ionic contrast media improve patient comfort due to the better taste and provide the same opacification in comparison to conventional oral contrast media. At present, their use should be limited to individual cases due to the higher costs.
authors.affiliation: Institut für Radiologie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Charité Mitte. gerd.diederichs@charite.de
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Diederichs
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Franiel
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Asbach
authors.forename: V
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Romano
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Hamm
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Rogalla
mesh_terms: D000284:Administration, Oral; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics*; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D003974:Diatrizoate Meglumine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007275:Injections, Intravenous; D007421:Intestine, Small / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D007472:Iohexol / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000031:analogs & derivatives / Q000191:economics*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010342:Patient Acceptance of Health Care; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011860:Radiography, Abdominal; D012015:Reference Standards; D013649:Taste; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed; D014283:Triiodobenzoic Acids / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics*