This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • 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 this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Daniel F. Marcus, MD; Jerald A. Bovino, MD; David Williams, MS
Toledo

Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102(6):825.

	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.

—Intravenous (IV) fluorescein angiography has become a widely accepted diagnostic tool in ophthalmology since its description by Novatny and Alvis¹ in 1961. Numerous adverse effects during fluorescein angiography, including allergic reaction, hypertensive crisis, and myocardial infarction have been reported. We prospectively observed and reported adverse reactions during fluorescein angiography among a series of 5,460 consecutive patients during a ten-year period.

The first 2,360 consecutive patients received 5 mL of 10% fluorescein sodium. The subsequent 3,100 patients received 3 mL of 25% fluorescein sodium. All adverse effects reported by the patient and observed by the photographer were recorded (Table).

The incidence of adverse effects using 10% dye was 9.2%, whereas the incidence with 25% dye was 9.5%. Nausea was the most common side effect of IV fluorescein angiography, occurring in 6% of all patients. Vomiting was uncommon, occurring in only 1%. There were five severe reactions . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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