RADIOCONTRAST-ASSOCIATED RENAL DYSFUNCTION - A COMPARISON OF LOWER-OSMOLALITY AND CONVENTIONAL HIGH-OSMOLALITY CONTRAST-MEDIA

被引:106
作者
LAUTIN, EM
FREEMAN, NJ
SCHOENFELD, AH
BAKAL, CW
HARAMITI, N
FRIEDMAN, AC
LAUTIN, JL
BRAHA, S
KADISH, EG
SPRAYREGEN, S
BELIZON, I
机构
[1] TEMPLE UNIV,MED CTR,DEPT RADIOL,PHILADELPHIA,PA 19140
[2] COLUMBIA UNIV COLL PHYS & SURG,DEPT RADIOL,NEW YORK,NY 10032
[3] MONTEFIORE MED CTR,DEPT RENAL MED,BRONX,NY 10467
关键词
D O I
10.2214/ajr.157.1.2048540
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Nephropathy is an established untoward event associated with intravascular administration of conventional high-osmolality contrast media (HOM). It has not been shown previously that lower-osmolality contrast media (LOM) are less nephrotoxic in a clinical setting. We evaluate the ability to replace HOM with LOM (in lower-extremity angiography) to reduce the incidence of nephropathy. We use multiple definitions for contrast-induced nephropathy (six different magnitudes of rise of serum levels of creatinine or blood urea nitrogen in various periods). The incidences of nephrotoxic effects with LOM vs HOM in patients with presumed risk factors, including preexisting renal insufficiency and diabetes, are evaluated also. When all patients are considered, the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy for LOM vs HOM (defined as an increase in serum creatinine level > 0.3 mg/dl and > 20% on day 1, 2, or 3 and on day 5, 6, or 7, is 7% vs 26% (p = .001). When only patients with preangiography azotemia are considered, the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy for LOM vs HOM is 10% vs 41% (p = .017); for diabetic patients, regardless of preangiography creatinine level, the incidence is 10% vs 31% (p = .012). Although contrast-induced nephropathy may develop even in a patient with no risk factors who receives LOM, LOM is associated with a decreased incidence of this condition, to various degrees, depending on the presence of risk factors.
引用
收藏
页码:59 / 65
页数:7
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] NEPHROTOXICITY OF IONIC AND NON-IONIC CONTRAST-MEDIA IN AORTO-FEMORAL ANGIOGRAPHY
    ALBRECHTSSON, U
    HULTBERG, B
    LARUSDOTTIR, H
    NORGREN, L
    [J]. ACTA RADIOLOGICA-DIAGNOSIS, 1985, 26 (05): : 615 - 618
  • [2] A DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARATIVE-STUDY OF HEXABRIX AND RENOGRAFIN-76 IN AORTOGRAPHY AND VISCERAL ARTERIOGRAPHY
    BARTH, KH
    MERTENS, MA
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1984, 19 (06) : S323 - S325
  • [3] RADIOLOGIC CONTRAST-INDUCED NEPHROPATHY
    BERKSETH, RO
    KJELLSTRAND, CM
    [J]. MEDICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1984, 68 (02) : 351 - 370
  • [4] COMPARISON OF AN IONIC WITH A NONIONIC CONTRAST AGENT FOR CARDIAC ANGIOGRAPHY - RESULTS OF A MULTICENTER TRIAL
    BETTMANN, MA
    HIGGINS, CB
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1985, 20 (01) : S70 - S74
  • [5] RADIOCONTRAST-INDUCED ACUTE RENAL-FAILURE - CLINICAL AND PATHOPHYSIOLOGIC REVIEW
    BYRD, L
    SHERMAN, RL
    [J]. MEDICINE, 1979, 58 (03) : 270 - 279
  • [6] PREDICTING ANGIOGRAPHY-INDUCED ACUTE RENAL-FUNCTION IMPAIRMENT - CLINICAL RISK MODEL
    COCHRAN, ST
    WONG, WS
    ROE, DJ
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1983, 141 (05) : 1027 - 1033
  • [7] RENAL-FUNCTION FOLLOWING INFUSION OF RADIOLOGIC CONTRAST MATERIAL - A PROSPECTIVE CONTROLLED-STUDY
    CRAMER, BC
    PARFREY, PS
    HUTCHINSON, TA
    BARAN, D
    MELANSON, DM
    ETHIER, RE
    SEELY, JF
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1985, 145 (01) : 87 - 89
  • [8] FISCHER HW, 1988, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V260, P1614
  • [9] RENAL TOXICITY OF CONTRAST AGENTS - IOPAMIDOL, LOTHALAMATE, AND DIATRIZOATE
    GALE, ME
    ROBBINS, AH
    HAMBURGER, RJ
    WIDRICH, WC
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1984, 142 (02) : 333 - 335
  • [10] ACUTE RENAL DYSFUNCTION IN HIGH-RISK PATIENTS AFTER ANGIOGRAPHY - COMPARISON OF IONIC AND NONIONIC CONTRAST-MEDIA
    GOMES, AS
    LOIS, JF
    BAKER, JD
    MCGLADE, CT
    BUNNELL, DH
    HARTZMAN, S
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1989, 170 (01) : 65 - 68