Contrast Agent Administration as a Source of Liability: A Legal Database Analysis

Abstract

Background Radiology ranks high in terms of specialties implicated in medical malpractice claims. While most radiologists understand the risks of liability for missed findings or lapses of communication, liability for the use of contrast agents in imaging procedures may be underappreciated. Purpose To review the clinical context and outcomes of lawsuits alleging medical malpractice for contrast-related imaging procedures. Materials and Methods Two large U.S. legal databases were queried using the terms "Contrast" and "Radiology OR Radiologist" from database inception to October 31, 2022, to identify cases with published decisions or settlements related to medical malpractice in patients who underwent contrast-related imaging procedures. The search results were screened to include only those cases involving the practice area of health care law where there was at least one claim of medical negligence against a health care institution or provider. Data on the medical complications alleged by patients after contrast agent administration and on the trial were extracted and reported using descriptive statistics. Results A total of 151 published case summaries were included in the analysis. Anaphylactic reaction following contrast agent administration was the most common medical complication observed (30% [45 of 151 cases]), of which failure to diagnose developing anaphylaxis or failure to treat the anaphylactic reaction made up the majority of allegations (93% [42 of 45]). Inappropriate management of contrast media extravasation (27% [41 of 151]) and alleged contrast agent-induced acute kidney injury (13% [19 of 151]) were the next most frequent causes of lawsuits. Of the 11 cases of alleged kidney injury that went to trial, all resulted in a judgment in favor of the defense. Conclusion This study highlights the key reasons for medical malpractice lawsuits associated with use of contrast media and outcomes from these lawsuits. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Trop in this issue.

Graphical abstract

Figure 1:

Methodologic flowchart shows number of cases meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Figure 2:

Histogram shows year-wise distribution of events.