4 ms·
That's surprising, it's at least casually known that they're bio accumulative to some extent. I've joked to the techs before about gadolinium eventually accumul
by drum55 1y ago
That's surprising, it's at least casually known that they're bio accumulative to some extent. I've joked to the techs before about gadolinium eventually accumulating enough to not be necessary if you do it with enough frequency. Realistically though any situation that you're doing the contrast you're probably at a lot more risk of whatever they've found than from the contrast agent.
- smeej 1y agoI had to have contrast to diagnose a simple cyst, which is entirely asymptomatic and was discovered by accident in the background of a cardiac MRI (family history of SCD, but my own heart is fine). You're making me feel lucky about what was otherwise a very unpleasant experience!
- koolba 1y agoMaybe donate some plasma afterward. There was a study about firefighters exposed to microplastics that had a statistical reduction after regular donations. Pretty much just diluting it out of your system.
- whatevaa 1y agoMaterials like these accumulate in other parts of your body, like bones. Letting some blood out is not gonna change it.
- notimetorelax 1y agoNah, they used it on me when I cracked a toe. If I knew that this may be that dangerous I’d go the way without the contrast agent.
- wobfan 1y agoBased on what I've read I'm quite sure a cracked toe is way more dangerous than a contrast agent.
- notimetorelax 1y agoMaybe, but I was taking an immense amount of vitamin C as prescribed by the doc to bootstrap the healing process. So this reveals to me two issues 1. In general side effects of the contrast agent are not communicated properly. If I knew, I might have asked - hey can you do the analysis without the agent? 2. There’s no recommendation to avoid vitamin C prior and right after the MRI, heightening the risk.
- lostlogin 1y agoYes. A chemist gave a great talk about this at a big MRI conference (ISMRM) in Paris 10ish years ago. His explanation was that gad behaves a lot like iron does in the body. It deposits where iron does and like iron it lacks a metabolic route for removal (though menstruating females lose iron). He stated that deposition was entirely predictable. However the harm caused is still debated. The article here says ‘ Dr Wagner theorized that nanoparticle formation could trigger a disproportionate immune response, with affected cells sending distress signals that intensify the body’s reaction.’ Emphasis on ‘theorised’. Deposition is discussed in the below link, and the comparison with iron is briefly mentioned. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10791848/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10791848/