silicon and iodixanol

The purpose of this study was to determine the performance of two balloon-retention-type gastrostomy tubes when the balloons are inflated with two types of contrast materials at different concentrations. Two commonly used balloon-retention-type tubes (MIC and Tri-Funnel) were inflated to the manufacturer's recommended volumes (4 and 20 cm(3), respectively) with normal saline or normal saline plus different concentrations of contrast material. Five tubes of each brand were inflated with normal saline and 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% contrast material dilutions, using either nonionic hyperosmolar contrast, or nonionic iso-osmolar contrast. The tubes were submerged in a glass basin containing a solution with a pH of 4. Every week the tubes were visually inspected to determine the integrity of the balloons, and the diameter of the balloons was measured with a caliper. The tests were repeated every week for a total of 12 weeks. The MIC balloons deflated slightly faster over time than the Tri-Funnel balloons. The Tri-Funnel balloons remained relatively stable over the study period for the different concentrations of contrast materials. The deflation rates of the MIC balloons were proportionally related to the concentration of saline and inversely related to the concentration of the contrast material. At high contrast material concentrations, solidification of the balloons was observed. In conclusion, this in vitro study confirms that the use of diluted amounts of nonionic contrast materials is safe for inflating the balloons of two types of balloon-retention feeding tubes. High concentrations of contrast could result in solidification of the balloons and should be avoided.

Topics: Catheterization; Contrast Media; Fluoroscopy; Gastrostomy; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; In Vitro Techniques; Iohexol; Silicon; Time Factors; Triiodobenzoic Acids