NEPHROTOXICITY OF CONTRAST-MEDIA FOLLOWING CARDIAC ANGIOGRAPHY - PATHOGENESIS, CLINICAL COURSE, AND PREVENTIVE MEASURES, INCLUDING THE ROLE OF LOW-OSMOLALITY CONTRAST-MEDIA

OBJECTIVE: To review the incidence, definition, clinical course, risk factors, pathogenesis and prevention of contrast-associated nephropathy (CAN) following cardiac angiography with emphasis on differences between high-osmolality contrast media (HOCM) and low-osmolality contrast media (LOCM). DATA SOURCES: Investigations in animal models and in patients following cardiac angiography. DATA EXTRACTION: Animal models of the pathogenesis of CAN are presented. Human studies describing the incidence, clinical course, risk factors, and prevention of CAN are reviewed. Comparative clinical trials of HOCM (diatrizoate, metrizoate) and LOCM (iohexol, iopamidol, ioxaglate) nephrotoxicity following cardiac angiography are critically evaluated. DATA SYNTHESIS: All clinical studies comparing CAN of HOCM versus LOCM following cardiac angiography have some methodologic limitations (e.g., small sample size, lack of control for other factors) that may affect renal function, lack of stratification for other reported risk factors, and variable or short follow-up periods. CONCLUSIONS: Whether the incidence of CAN following cardiac angiography is reduced with LOCM remains controversial. The incidence of CAN in patients with normal renal function does not appear to differ in patients treated with LOCM versus HOCM because few patients in each group develop renal failure. Additional controlled clinical trials comparing CAN of LOCM and HOCM in patients with renal dysfunction are needed. Because of greater product cost and scarcity of documented benefit compared with HOCM, selection of LOCM based on the presence of renal dysfunction cannot be recommended at this time.