2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2009.02.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In vitro effects of coronary angiography: Unknown clinical implications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These stimuli has proinflammatory effects such as increased endothelin and substance P and changes in platelet function such as increased release of thromboxane A2 and enhancement of platelet aggregation but the clinical importance is still unknown. [30][31][32] In our study, we could not explain whether CL is likely to be a flow-related phenomenon or an interaction between contrast medium and a dysfunctional endothelium or both. Intravascular ultrasound is a more sensitive tool than CAG and other methods for the evaluation of plaque morphology.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 66%
“…These stimuli has proinflammatory effects such as increased endothelin and substance P and changes in platelet function such as increased release of thromboxane A2 and enhancement of platelet aggregation but the clinical importance is still unknown. [30][31][32] In our study, we could not explain whether CL is likely to be a flow-related phenomenon or an interaction between contrast medium and a dysfunctional endothelium or both. Intravascular ultrasound is a more sensitive tool than CAG and other methods for the evaluation of plaque morphology.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 66%
“…It is possible that the CM may have an effect on lymphocyte production or stimulation, in line with previous data that suggested a role for T-lymphocytes in delayed hypersensitivity to CM. [26][27][28][29] Haemoglobin In our study, we found that haemoglobin was significantly reduced at both 48 and 72 hours. This was probably due to haemodilution secondary to routine intravenous and oral rehydration following the procedure, 30 although our study design did not permit follow-up beyond 72 hours.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 53%