| Literature DB >> 21611058 |
H Mohd Nor1, Kj Jayapragasam, Bjj Abdullah.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic image quality between three different water soluble iodinated contrast media in hysterosalpingography (HSG). MATERIAL ANDEntities:
Keywords: Hysterosalpingography; contrast media
Year: 2009 PMID: 21611058 PMCID: PMC3097785 DOI: 10.2349/biij.5.3.e29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Imaging Interv J ISSN: 1823-5530
Chemical and Physical properties of the Contrast Media.
| Properties | Iodamide | Ioxaglate | Iopramide |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chemical Nature | Ionic water soluble | Ionic water soluble | Non Ionic water soluble |
| Iodine Contents (mgI/ml) | 249 | 320 | 300 |
| Viscosity (mPa.sec, 37°C) | 150 | 7.5 | 4.6 |
| Osmolality of a 280mgI/ml (mosmol/kg) | 1500 | 490 | 470 |
Comparison of patients' data in the Iodamide, Iopramide and Ioxaglate groups.
| Contrast Media | Iodamide | Iopramide | Ioxaglate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients | 114 | 106 | 98 |
| Race: | |||
| -Malay | 57 (50%) | 67 (63.2%) | 63 (64.3%) |
| -Chinese | 23 (20.2%) | 16 (15.1%) | 12 (12.2%) |
| -Indian | 32 (28.1%) | 21 (19.8%) | 22 (22.4%) |
| -Others | 2 ( 1.8%) | 2 ( 1.9%) | 1 ( 1%) |
| p = 0.055 (Race) | |||
| Age (years): | |||
| -mean | 30.5 | 30.17 | 30.83 |
| -range | 21 – 44 | 20 – 45 | 21 – 49 |
| p = 0.104 (Age) |
Scoring of image quality in different anatomical regions of interest using three different contrast media.
| Anatomical / Ratings | Contrast Medium | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iodamide | Iopramide | Ioxaglate | p value | |
| Number of patients | 114 | 106 | 98 | |
| Uterus opacification | ||||
| 0 | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | |
| 1 | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 1.000 |
| 2 | 2 ( 1.8%) | 2 ( 1.9%) | 1 ( 1%) | |
| 3 | 112 (98.2%) | 104 (98.1%) | 97 (99%) | |
| Uterine outline | ||||
| 0 | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | |
| 1 | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 1.000 |
| 2-3 | 114 (100%) | 106 (100%) | 98 (100%) | |
| Fallopian Tube | ||||
| 0 | 0 ( 0%) | 3 ( 2.9%) | 1 ( 1.0%) | |
| 1 | 15 (13.3%) | 20 (19.2%) | 14 (14.3%) | 0.173 |
| 2-3 | 98 (86.7%) | 81 (77.9%) | 83 (84.7%) | |
| Fimbrial rugae | ||||
| 0 | 11 ( 9.7%) | 7 ( 6.7%) | 5 ( 5.1%) | |
| 1 | 31 (27.4%) | 19 (18.3%) | 17 (17.3%) | <0.05 |
| 2-3 | 71 (62.8%) | 78 (75.0%) | 76 (77.6%) | |
| Intraperitoneal spillage | ||||
| 0 | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | |
| 1 | 3 ( 3.1%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0 ( 0%) | 0.05 |
| 2-3 | 94 (96.9%) | 101 (100%) | 91 (100%) | |
Summarized results from the ratings of image quality, 0 = Non diagnostic, 1=Acceptable Quality and 2-3 = Superior Quality. Statistical calculations are based on raw data
The incidence of tubal blockage using three different contrast media.
| Diagnoses | Contrast Medium | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Iodamide | Iopramide | Ioxaglate | |
| Unilateral Tubal Block | 20 (17.6%) | 26 (24.6%) | 24 (24.5%) |
| Bilateral Tubal Block | 17 (14.9%) | 5 ( 4.7%) | 7 ( 7.1%) |
Numbers represent number of blocked tubes.
The numbers in brackets is the equivalent in percentages.
Incidence of contrast media intravasation using three different contrast media.
| Contrast | Contrast Intravasation | Blocked Tubes | Patent Tubes | Hydrosalpinx |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iodamide | 15 (13.2%) | 7 | 8 | 0 |
| Iopramide | 4 ( 3.8%) | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Ioxaglate | 0 ( 0%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Numbers represent number of contrast intravasation. The numbers in brackets is the equivalent in percentages.
Figure 1Demonstration of fallopian tube outline with Iopramide (a) and Iodamide (b). Note the sharper outline of the fallopian tubes seen in the Iodamide group in comparison with Iopramide group.
Figure 2Demonstration of fimbrial rugae outline with Iodamide (a) and Iopramide (b). Note the sharper outline of the fimbrial rugaes seen in the Iopramide group in comparison with Iodamide group.
Figure 3This is a HSG study image using Iodamide contrast media (conventional contrast media). Note the uterine cavity is too dense for the visualisation of filling defects from an intra-uterine submucosal fibroid.
Figure 5Venous intravasation seen as a network of thin vessels on top of uterus and in a pattern that could be confused with tubal filling.