From my understanding, an MRI with contrast provides a much better image and you can get a lot of info from it. I also understand that there are risks with contrast/possible allergies and certain contraindications. And I understand that mri without contrast can be sufficient in many cases. So why would a doc order an MRI with AND without contrast? Why not just with?
In: 3
The one reason I am positive about why a person would chose not to use contrast is based on kidney function. When my mother had one working kidney and was a transplant patient every time we took her to the hospital we were told by her nephrologist to never allow contrast unless it’s life threatening. Apparently the contrast can damage the kidney or let’s just say it’s hard on the kidney. It wouldn’t damage it if you had a properly functioning kidney but once it’s struggling it could make it struggle more. And if you only have one kidney that was donated from another human being (most likely as a result of them dying), you protect that kidney with your life. So even when it’s working properly you baby it and don’t take anything that could harm it or make it weaker. The gift of life is hard to come by.
Latest Answers