Iotrolan in urography: efficacy and tolerance in comparison with iohexol and iopamidol

Adolph, J; Engelkamp, H.; Herbig, W.; Peters, P. E.; Bi, Wenzel-Hora

doi:10.1007/bf02343264

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results are similar to the results reported in the literature [5,6,7,8] when comparing non-ionic monomers and dimers in patients with normal renal function undergoing IVU. Better calyceal and pelvic opacification and more frequent detection of papillary blush were shown following iodixanol and these findings support a higher iodine concentration in the pelvicalyceal system.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison between the efficacy of dimeric and monomeric non-ionic contrast media (iodixanol vs iopromide) in urography in patients with macroscopic haematuria

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-ionic dimers induce less diuresis than non-ionic monomers, resulting in increased opacification of the urinary tract in intravenous urography. This trial compared the diagnostic efficacy of iodixanol and iopromide in patients with macroscopic haematuria. One hundred consecutive patients with normal renal function and macroscopic haematuria entered a double blind, comparative, randomised, parallel trial. Contrast media were given with bolus injection in doses of 300 mgI/kg b.w. Radiographs were blindly evaluated by three radiologists who analysed different parameters (calyceal density and filling, papillary blush detection, delineation of collecting ducts, renal pelvis opacification, visualisation of ureters, bladder density, bladder distention) and estimated the diagnostic confidence (whether abnormal findings were definitely absent, probably absent, doubtful, probably present or certainly present). Radiological diagnoses were compared with final diagnoses. Results were summarised as the ratio of the odds of having a worse performance of iopromide vs iodixanol. Iodixanol showed a significantly better calyceal density and filling [odds ratio (OR): 1.96; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.60-2.41], a significantly better pelvis opacification (OR 2.91; CI 2.02-4.18) and a significantly more frequent papillary blush detection (OR 1.95; CI 1.29-2.95). Iopromide showed a significantly better ureteral visualisation (OR 0.67; CI 0.48-0.92) and a significantly higher bladder distention (OR 0.59; CI 0.36-0.99). Iodixanol allowed a significantly higher diagnostic confidence as to calyceal evaluation (OR 1.35; CI 1.01-1.79). No significant differences were found with regard to other parameters. The results confirmed theoretical expectations. The higher opacification provided by iodixanol allowed better results and a higher diagnostic confidence in the upper excretory pathway.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Furthermore, non-ionic dimers induce less diuresis than non-ionic monomers, resulting in increased opacification of the urinary tract [5,6,7,8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between the efficacy of dimeric and monomeric non-ionic contrast media (iodixanol vs iopromide) in urography in patients with macroscopic haematuria

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, poorer distention of the excretory pathway might be forecast, which could be perceived as a limitation. Indeed, greater opacification of the excretory pathway following administration of non ionic dimers has been shown in some series of patients with normal renal function [1,33].…”

Section: Efficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Current iodinated contrast media

Stacul

2001

European Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of scientific papers on iodinated contrast media is declining. Indeed, comparative trials between high-osmolality and low-osmolality agents largely showed the higher safety and tolerability of the latter, and this is no longer a matter of discussion. Only financial constraints could prevent a total conversion to low-osmolality agents. Research comparing low-osmolality (nonionic monomers, ionic dimer) and iso-osmolality contrast media (nonionic dimers) are still ongoing. Both classes of nonionic compounds proved safer than the ionic dimer. The relative merits of nonionic monomers and nonionic dimers are a matter for debate, and criteria for a selective use of different agents for different procedures could be discussed.

show abstract