Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of aspiration pneumonia, nausea, and vomiting after intravascular administration of non-ionic iodinated contrast media (ICM) between patients who fasted before contrast injection and those who did not. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ovid-MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from their inception dates until September 2022 to identify original articles that met the following criteria: 1) randomized controlled trials or observational studies, 2) separate reports of the incidence of aspiration pneumonia, nausea, and vomiting after intravascular injection of non-ionic ICM, and 3) inclusion of patients undergoing radiological examinations without fasting. A bivariate beta-binomial model was used to compare the risk difference in adverse events between fasting and non-fasting groups. The I² statistic was used to assess heterogeneity across the studies. RESULTS: Ten studies, encompassing 308013 patients (non-fasting, 158442), were included in this meta-analysis. No cases of aspiration pneumonia were reported. The pooled incidence of nausea was 4.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4%, 7.8%) in the fasting group and 4.6% (95% CI: 1.1%, 8.1%) in the non-fasting group. The pooled incidence of vomiting was 2.1% (95% CI: 0.0%, 4.2%) in the fasting group and 2.5% (95% CI: 0.7%, 4.2%) in the non-fasting group. The risk difference (incidence in the non-fasting group-incidence in the fasting group) in the incidence of nausea and vomiting was 0.0% (95% CI: -4.7%, 4.7%) and 0.4% (95% CI: -2.3%, 3.1%), respectively. Heterogeneity between the studies was low (I² = 0%-13.5%). CONCLUSION: Lack of fasting before intravascular administration of non-ionic ICM for radiological examinations did not increase the risk of emetic complications significantly. This finding suggests that hospitals can relax fasting policies without compromising patient safety.