Appraisal of guidelines for managing contrast medium in patients with metformin: consensuses, controversies, and gaps

Fan, Yun; Cai, Qing-Qing; Chen, Shun Hua; Zhang, Bin; Zhang, Yixun; Zhen, Jinhuan; Zhang, Gaoxing

doi:10.1007/s00330-023-09611-2

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The guidelines were defined as documents that self-identified as a guideline, or a guidance document with recommendations including consensus, appropriateness criteria, manual, etc. [ 21 , 22 ]. We restricted the publication time from 01 January 2018 onwards to present the recent developments on this topic, and only guidelines written in English and Chinese were available.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Just give the contrast? Appraisal of guidelines on intravenous iodinated contrast media use in patients with kidney disease

Zhong,

Chen,

Xing

et al. 2024

Insights Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To appraise the quality of guidelines on intravenous iodinated contrast media (ICM) use in patients with kidney disease, and to compare the recommendations among them. Methods We searched four literature databases, eight guideline libraries, and ten homepages of radiological societies to identify English and Chinese guidelines on intravenous ICM use in patients with kidney disease published between January 2018 and June 2023. The quality of the guidelines was assessed with the Scientific, Transparent, and Applicable Rankings (STAR) tool. Results Ten guidelines were included, with a median STAR score of 46.0 (range 28.5–61.5). The guidelines performed well in “Recommendations” domain (31/40, 78%), while poor in “Registry” (0/20, 0%) and “Protocol” domains (0/20, 0%). Nine guidelines recommended estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 as the cutoff for referring patients to discuss the risk-benefit balance of ICM administration. Three guidelines further suggested that patients with an eGFR < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2 and high-risk factors also need referring. Variable recommendations were seen in the acceptable time interval between renal function test and ICM administration, and that between scan and repeated scan. Nine guidelines recommended to use iso-osmolar or low-osmolar ICM, while no consensus has been reached for the dosing of ICM. Nine guidelines supported hydration after ICM use, but their protocols varied. Drugs or blood purification therapy were not recommended as preventative means. Conclusion Guidelines on intravenous ICM use in patients with kidney disease have heterogeneous quality. The scientific societies may consider joint statements on controversial recommendations for variable timing and protocols. Critical relevance statement The heterogeneous quality of guidelines, and their controversial recommendations, leave gaps in workflow timing, dosing, and post-administration hydration protocols of contrast-enhanced CT scans for patients with kidney diseases, calling for more evidence to establish a safer and more practicable workflow. Key points • Guidelines concerning iodinated contrast media use in kidney disease patients vary. • Controversy remains in workflow timing, contrast dosing, and post-administration hydration protocols. • Investigations are encouraged to establish a safer iodinated contrast media use workflow. Graphical Abstract

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%