Literature DB >> 3882619

Comparison of an ionic with a nonionic contrast agent for cardiac angiography. Results of a multicenter trial.

M A Bettmann, C B Higgins.   

Abstract

Ionic contrast agents currently used in cardiac angiography are well tolerated but have certain negative effects. In a five-center study of 273 patients undergoing cardiac catheterization, safety and efficacy of the new nonionic contrast agent, iohexol, were compared with that of the standard ionic material, sodium methylglucamine diatrizoate. Contrast injections were made into the left ventricle and left and right coronary arteries in all patients. Left ventricular, systemic arterial and pulmonary capillary wedge pressures, and electrocardiogram lead II were recorded for 2 minutes. Following the first right and first left coronary injection, systemic arterial pressure and electrocardiographic recordings were made for 1 minute. After each subsequent coronary injection, recordings were made for 20 seconds. Both agents were found to be safe and both provided good diagnostic information. Iohexol was seen to cause both less marked overall hemodynamic alterations and a lower incidence of significant changes in pressure and heart rate. Iohexol may have an important role in coronary angiography and left ventriculography, particularly in high-risk patients, because of its lesser effect on heart rate and blood pressure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3882619     DOI: 10.1097/00004424-198501002-00017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  8 in total

Review 1.  Reactions to radiocontrast material. Anaphylactoid events in radiology.

Authors:  P L Lieberman; R L Seigle
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 8.667

2.  Measurement of cardiac output from a test-bolus injection in multislice computed tomography.

Authors:  Andreas H Mahnken; Ernst Klotz; Anja Hennemuth; Bettina Jung; Ralf Koos; Joachim E Wildberger; Rolf W Günther
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Clinical and economic factors in the selection of low-osmolality contrast media.

Authors:  W H Matthai
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  The new contrast agents: a perspective.

Authors:  M A Bettmann
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 5.  Should nonionic radiographic contrast media be given to all patients?

Authors:  P S Parfrey; B C Cramer; P J McManamon
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1988-03-15       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Andreas H Mahnken; Ralf Koos; Marcus Katoh; Elmar Spuentrup; Petra Busch; Joachim E Wildberger; Harald P Kühl; Rolf W Günther
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-01-29       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Safety of the nonionic contrast medium omnipaque in coronary angiography.

Authors:  K Levorstad; K Vatne; U Brodahl; B Laake; S Simonsen; T Aakhus
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  1989 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.740

8.  Iodixanol Has a Favourable Fibrinolytic Profile Compared to Iohexol in Cardiac Patients Undergoing Elective Angiography: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Parallel Group Study.

Authors:  Andrew T Treweeke; Benjamin H Maskrey; Kirsty Hickson; John H Miller; Stephen J Leslie; Ian L Megson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.