AIM: To compare the incidence, and risk factors, in-hospital and at the 18-month prognosis of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) according to the definition utilized: as an increase in serum creatinine (Scr) ≥ 0.5 mg/dL (CIN 1) or as an increase in Scr ≥ 25% above baseline values (CIN 2). METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively evaluated CIN according to two different definitions in 150 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in simple lesions employing a low-medium dose of contrast media. Incidence of CIN was higher using the CIN 2 definition than CIN 1 (9.3% vs. 4%; p=0.0133). Patients with CIN 1 had a higher incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) (66.7% vs. 13.9%; p=0.006), higher mean serum creatinine levels (1.35±0.42 vs. 0.98±0.35; p=0.001) and lower mean eGFR levels (58.3±19.6 vs. 84±25.9; p=0.002). Patients with CIN 2 had a higher incidence of anemia (57.1% vs. 30.9%; p=0.049) and a higher mean contrast media volume was used (142.6±62.2 mL vs. 110.6±57.2 mL; p=0.05). In the multivariate analysis the only significant variable associated with CIN (CIN 2) was a higher volume of contrast media (OR=1.01; p=0.04). There were no differences in the major in-hospital events, but patients with CIN (both definitions) had a longer in-hospital stay. A persistent rise in serum creatinine at discharge occurred in only one patient. There were no differences between patients with and without CIN in events at the follow-up, with the exception of an increased risk of new hospitalization in patients with CIN 2. CONCLUSION: After PCI employing low-medium dose of contrast media the incidence of CIN varied according to the definition used. Neither of the two definitions offers additional information compared with the other. Chronic kidney disease and baseline parameters of renal function are the risk factors associated with CIN 1; anemia and higher volume of contrast media are associated with CIN 2.
AIM: To compare the incidence, and risk factors, in-hospital and at the 18-month prognosis of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) according to the definition utilized: as an increase in serum creatinine (Scr) ≥ 0.5 mg/dL (CIN 1) or as an increase in Scr ≥ 25% above baseline values (CIN 2). METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively evaluated CIN according to two different definitions in 150 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in simple lesions employing a low-medium dose of contrast media. Incidence of CIN was higher using the CIN 2 definition than CIN 1 (9.3% vs. 4%; p=0.0133). Patients with CIN 1 had a higher incidence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) (66.7% vs. 13.9%; p=0.006), higher mean serum creatinine levels (1.35±0.42 vs. 0.98±0.35; p=0.001) and lower mean eGFR levels (58.3±19.6 vs. 84±25.9; p=0.002). Patients with CIN 2 had a higher incidence of anemia (57.1% vs. 30.9%; p=0.049) and a higher mean contrast media volume was used (142.6±62.2 mL vs. 110.6±57.2 mL; p=0.05). In the multivariate analysis the only significant variable associated with CIN (CIN 2) was a higher volume of contrast media (OR=1.01; p=0.04). There were no differences in the major in-hospital events, but patients with CIN (both definitions) had a longer in-hospital stay. A persistent rise in serum creatinine at discharge occurred in only one patient. There were no differences between patients with and without CIN in events at the follow-up, with the exception of an increased risk of new hospitalization in patients with CIN 2. CONCLUSION: After PCI employing low-medium dose of contrast media the incidence of CIN varied according to the definition used. Neither of the two definitions offers additional information compared with the other. Chronic kidney disease and baseline parameters of renal function are the risk factors associated with CIN 1; anemia and higher volume of contrast media are associated with CIN 2.
Authors: Christian Roth; Rudolf Berger; Sabine Scherzer; Lisa Krenn; Clemens Gangl; Daniel Dalos; Georg Delle-Karth; Thomas Neunteufl Journal: Heart Vessels Date: 2015-09-14 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Sang Yup Lim; Eun Hui Bae; Joon Seok Choi; Chang Seong Kim; Seong Kwon Ma; Youngkeun Ahn; Myung Ho Jeong; Weon Kim; Jong Shin Woo; Young Jo Kim; Myeong Chan Cho; Chong Jin Kim; Soo Wan Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2013-07-03 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Murat Ugur; Mahmut Uluganyan; Ahmet Ekmekci; Mehmet Bozbay; Gurkan Karaca; Gokhan Cicek; Bayram Koroglu; Eyup Tusun; Ahmet Murat; Burak Turan; Huseyin Uyarel; Ahmet Lutfi Orhan; Mehmet Eren Journal: Med Sci Monit Date: 2014-06-12
Authors: Werner Ribitsch; Joerg H Horina; Franz Quehenberger; Alexander R Rosenkranz; Gernot Schilcher Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 4.379