This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

William A. Anthony, MD, PA
Amarillo, Tex

JAMA. 1989;261(10):1441.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

I have two observations concerning the article entitled "The Introduction of Low-Osmolar Contrast Agents in Radiology" by Mr Jacobson and Dr Rosenquist¹ in the September 16 issue of THE JOURNAL and the accompanying editorial²: The projected saving of $1 billion is based on using the contrast media in only 15% to 20% of the patients. I doubt very much that only 15% to 20% of the patients fall into the long list of high-risk patients on page 1588 of the article (ie, infants, elderly patients, diabetic patients, patients with a history of allergy, patients with asthma, patients with a history of reaction to previous contrast media, and patients with renal or cardiac disease). Particularly if you include patients with a history of allergy, you will place the vast majority of patients in the high-risk category, thereby reducing the saving considerably.

Second, the article and the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Edited by Drummond Rennie, MD, Deputy Editor (West).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?