A comparison of Iohexol and Conray-60 in peripheral angiography

Gordon, IJ; Skoblar, RS; Chicatelli, PD; Leon, Juan De

doi:10.2214/ajr.142.3.563

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the group that received ionic CM, the incidence of adverse reactions was as follows: total reactions 4.1% (247), mild reactions 2.5% (152), moderate reactions 1.2% (71), and severe reactions 0.4% (24). In the patients receiving nonionic CM, the incidence of adverse reactions was as follows: total reactions 0.69% (50), mild reactions 0.58% (42), moderate reactions 0.11% (8), and no severe reactions.…”

Section: Studies Of Primary Interesrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives on Adverse Reaction Rates Associated with the Use of High Osmolar Ionic and Low Osmolar Nonionic Contrast Media

Wilcock

Santamaría

Frankos

et al. 1990

Journal of the American College of Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Downloaded from WILCOCK ET AL.media. This report presents the results of that review of the literature and of the evaluation of the data by Katayama et and concludes that the evidence indicates that differences exist in serious adverse drug reaction rates between ionic and nonionic CM. Content and organizationThis report first presents an overview of comparisons between ionic and nonionic CM in biological systems, including in vivo laboratory animal experiments and in vitro studies (Part I). Part I1 presents briefly the results of some recent studies comparing the effects of ionic and nonionic CM on components of the coagulation process in vitro. These findings are consistent with the concept that blood coagulation is inhibited to a greater degree by ionic iodinated CM. A description of adverse reactions to CM as reported in the smaller comparative studies involving direct comparisons of nonionic with ionic CM is included as Part 111 in order to show the concordance of findings between these studies and the Palmer'3' and Katayama et al.") studies.Part IV contains a critical evaluation of the two largest, most recent prospective studies comparing the incidence of adverse reactions associated with the use of the two kinds of contrast agents. This section includes a statement on the clinical perspective of the use of nonionic CM in radiographic procedures prepared by Harry W. Fischer, M.D. (former professor and chairman of the department of radiology, University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, NY). An evaluation of the potential advantages of the use of nonionic CM over ionic CM with regard to the occurrence of severe adverse reactions can be found in Part V. Animal studies: General toxicityOverall, the acute toxicity, cardiovascular toxicity, and chemotoxicity data suggest that the nonionic CM are uniformly less toxic than the ionic CM. This finding is expected, since many of the observed toxic effects attributed to the use of CM are associated with the osmolarity of these agents relative to blood. Cardiovascular and hemodynamic aspects of CM are perhaps better studied than any other types of toxicity because of the extensive use of CM in cardiac angiography and the wealth of clinical data on cardiac function collected during such procedures, The use of nonionic CM appears to be associated with fewer cardiac-related adverse reactions than ionic CM, perhaps also due in large part to their lower osmolarity. Effect of contrast media on coagulationNonionic CM have relatively less anticoagulant activity than ionic CM. However, the clinical significance of this phenomenon is unknown. Current package inserts for both types of CM include statements about clotting potential based on in vitro studies. No new information was found that would alter the concept that ionic iodinated CM inhibit blood coagulation to a greater degree than nonionic CM.

show abstract

Section: Studies Of Primary Interesrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives on Adverse Reaction Rates Associated with the Use of High Osmolar Ionic and Low Osmolar Nonionic Contrast Media

Wilcock

Santamaría

Frankos

et al. 1990

Journal of the American College of Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subsequent studies have shown LOCM to be safer than ionic media following intravenous injection (12,17), cause less pain and discomfort on intra-arterial injection (6,8,9,14,19) and lead to reduced effects on cardiac haemodynamics (I, 7, 13).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transfemoral Digital Subtraction Aortography

Naisby¹,

Owen²,

Alexander³

et al. 1991

Acta Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ionic monomer, sodium diatrizoate at 150 mg L'ml (726 mosmol/kg) and the non-ionic monomer, iopamidol, diluted to the same iodine concentration but at 324.3 mosmol/kg, were randomly allocated to patients undergoing transfemoral intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography for lower limb peripheral vascular disease. The agents produced images of comparable quality and diagnostic efficacy. There were no significant differences between the media regarding sensations of pain and warmth. Minor neurological symptoms (headache and dizziness) occurred 7 times more frequently with the ionic monomer. There was a slight but temporary rise in plasma potassium one hour after injection of the ionic monomer but no evidence of appreciable intravascular haemolysis. The nonionic monomer caused a slight fall in haemoglobin and haematocrit one hour after injection which is attributed to osmotic haemodilution. It is concluded that a diluted high osmolar contrast agent is an acceptable alternative to a low osmolar agent in transfemoral digital subtraction lower limb aortography.

show abstract

Radiological contrast media

Ansell¹

1985

Side Effects of Drugs Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparison of Iohexol and Conray-60 in peripheral angiography

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Perspectives on Adverse Reaction Rates Associated with the Use of High Osmolar Ionic and Low Osmolar Nonionic Contrast Media

Perspectives on Adverse Reaction Rates Associated with the Use of High Osmolar Ionic and Low Osmolar Nonionic Contrast Media

Transfemoral Digital Subtraction Aortography

Radiological contrast media

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About