Acta Scientific Neurology (ASNE)

Research Article Volume 5 Issue 8

The Comparison of the Incidence Rate of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy with Iodixanol, Iohexol, and Iopromide Following Coronary Angiography

Naser Hadavand1, Mahshid Sadat Moradi Hossein Zadeh1*, Fariborz Farsad1, Reza Golpira1, Hooman Bakhshandeh1, Maedeh Sharifian1, Maryam Jafari2, Ali Mohammad Farahmand3 and Kiara Rezaei-Kalantari1,4*

1Rajaei Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2Department of Radiology, Ali Asghar Children’s Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4Cardio-Oncology Research Center, Rajaei Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

*Corresponding Author: Kiara Rezaei-Kalantari, Rajaei Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran and Cardio-Oncology Research Center, Rajaei Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Received: June 21, 2022; Published: July 14, 2022

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) with the three commonly used contrast media in coronary angiography.

Methods: In this prospective observational study, 574 consecutive patients who were referred for coronary angiography to our cardiovascular center, were included. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the received contrast media, including iopromide (Ultravist®), iodixanol (Visipaque®), and iohexol (Omnipaque®). Patients’ demographic characteristics, past medical history, and risk factors were recorded. Renal function was evaluated in all the patients within 48 hours before and 72 hours after the procedure. CIN was defined as an increase in the serum creatinine level by 0.5mg/dl or by 0.25% from the baseline.

Results: Our results demonstrated that CIN occurred similarly in the 3 groups of contrast media (p-value = 0.935). Moreover, multivariate analysis revealed significant adjusted associations between CIN and smoking (OR: 2.832, 95% CI: 1.098-7.303, P: 0.031), pre-existing renal disease (OR: 8.252, 95% CI: 3.145-21.654, P < 0.001) and volume of contrast media (OR:1.004, 95% CI:1.001-1.008, P:0.024).

Conclusion: The three commonly used contrast media, iopromide, iohexol, and iodixanol have a similar risk of CIN in patients undergoing coronary angiography with or without PCI.

 

Keywords: Contrast Media; Coronary Angiography; Contrast-Induced Nephropathy; Iopromide; Iodixanol; Iohexol

References

  1. Elicker BM., et al. “IV contrast administration for CT: a survey of practices for the screening and prevention of contrast nephropathy”. American Journal of Roentgenology-New Series6 (2006): 1651.
  2. Morcos S., et al. “Contrast-media-induced nephrotoxicity: a consensus report”. European Radiology8 (1999): 1602-1613.
  3. Newhouse JH., et al. “Frequency of serum creatinine changes in the absence of iodinated contrast material: implications for studies of contrast nephrotoxicity”. American Journal of Roentgenology 2 (2008): 376-382.
  4. Rao QA and Newhouse JH. “Risk of nephropathy after intravenous administration of contrast material: a critical literature analysis”. Radiology2 (2006): 392-397.
  5. Katzberg RW and Barrett BJ. “Risk of iodinated contrast material-induced nephropathy with intravenous administration”. Radiology3 (2007): 622-628.
  6. Jacobi D., et al. “Variability in creatinine excretion in adult diabetic, overweight men and women: consequences on creatinine-based classification of renal disease”. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice1 (2008): 102-107.
  7. Stone G., et al. “Contrast induced nephropathy: pathophysiology and strategies for prevention”. Key opinion leaders [CD-ROM] Lambertville, NJ: Center for Advanced Medical Education (2004).
  8. James GD., et al. “A longitudinal study of urinary creatinine and creatinine clearance in normal subjects: race, sex, and age differences”. American Journal of Hypertension2 (19888): 124-131.
  9. Toffaletti JG and McDonnell EH. “Variation of serum creatinine, cystatin C, and creatinine clearance tests in persons with normal renal function”. Clinica Chimica Acta1-2 (2008): 115-119.
  10. Pedersen MM., et al. “Determinants of intra-individual variation in kidney function in normoalbuminuric insulin-dependent diabetic patients: importance of atrial natriuretic peptide and glycaemic control”. Clinical Science4 (1992): 445-451.
  11. Zhang F., et al. “Advances in the pathogenesis and prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy”. Life Sciences 259 (2020): 118379.
  12. Tsai TT., et al. “Contemporary incidence, predictors, and outcomes of acute kidney injury in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: insights from the NCDR Cath-PCI registry”. JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions1 (2014): 1-9.
  13. Feldkamp T., et al. “Nephrotoxicity of iso-osmolar versus low-osmolar contrast media is equal in low risk patients”. Clinical Nephrology5 (2006): 322-330.
  14. Azzalini L., et al. “Incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in a large cohort of all-comers undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Comparison of five contrast media”. International Journal of Cardiology 273 (2018): 69-73.
  15. From A., et al. “Iodixanol compared to iohexol for contrast procedures: a case-matched retrospective cohort study”. Acta Radiologica4 (2008): 409-414.
  16. Karlsberg RP., et al. “Contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) following intra-arterial administration of iodinated contrast media”. JN Journal of Nephrology6 (2010): 658.
  17. Reed MC., et al. “The relative renal safety of iodixanol and low-osmolar contrast media in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Insights from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2)”. The Journal of Invasive Cardiology10 (2010): 467-472.
  18. Feng Y., et al. “Iopromide and Iodixanol in the Development of Postoperative Contrast Nephropathy in Patients with Renal Insufficiency: A Meta-Analysis”. Journal of Healthcare Engineering (2022).
  19. Heinrich MC., et al. “Nephrotoxicity of iso-osmolar iodixanol compared with nonionic low-osmolar contrast media: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials”. Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK) (2009).
  20. Wang Y-C., et al. “Long-term adverse effects of low-osmolar compared with iso-osmolar contrast media after coronary angiography”. The American Journal of Cardiology 7 (2016): 985-990.
  21. Franke R-P and Jung F. “Pathophysiology of the contrast media-induced nephropathy (CIN) in patients undergoing coronary interventions”. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation1-2 (2013): 143-153.
  22. Mehran R., et al. “A simple risk score for prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention: development and initial validation”. Journal of the American College of Cardiology7 (2004): 1393-1399.
  23. Maliborski A., et al. “Contrast-induced nephropathy–a review of current literature and guidelines. Medical science monitor”. international medical journal of experimental and Clinical Research 9 (2011): RA199.

Citation

Citation: Kiara Rezaei-Kalantari., et al. “The Comparison of the Incidence Rate of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy with Iodixanol, Iohexol, and Iopromide Following Coronary Angiography". Acta Scientific Neurology 5.8 (2022): 25-33.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Kiara Rezaei-Kalantari., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.




Metrics

Acceptance rate32%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days

Indexed In




News and Events


Contact US