ABSTRACT
The incidence of nephrotoxicity occurring with the nonionic contrast agent, iohexol, and the ionic contrast agent, meglumine/sodium diatrizoate, was compared in 1196 patients undergoing cardiac angiography in a prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter trial. Patients were stratified into four groups: renal insufficiency (RI), diabetes mellitus (DM) both absent (N = 364); RI absent, DM present (N = 318); RI present, DM absent (N = 298); and RI and DM both present (N = 216). Serum creatinine levels were measured at -18 to 24, 0, and 24, 48, and 72 hours following contrast administration. Prophylactic hydration was administered pre- and post-angiography. Acute nephrotoxicity (increase in serum creatinine of > or = 1 mg/dl 48 to 72 hours post-contrast) was observed in 42 (7%) patients receiving diatrizoate compared to 19 (3%) patients receiving iohexol, P < 0.002. Differences in nephrotoxicity between the two contrast groups were confined to patients with RI alone or combined with DM. In a multivariate analysis, baseline serum creatinine, male gender, DM, volume of contrast agent, and RI were independently related to the risk of nephrotoxicity. Patients with RI receiving diatrizoate were 3.3 times as likely to develop acute nephrotoxicity compared to those receiving iohexol. Clinically severe adverse renal events were uncommon (N = 15) and did not differ in incidence between contrast groups (iohexol N = 6; diatrizoate N = 9). In conclusion, in patients undergoing cardiac angiography, only those with pre-existing RI alone or combined with DM are at higher risk for acute contrast nephrotoxicity.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Subject(s)
Angiocardiography , Diatrizoate Meglumine/adverse effects , Iohexol/adverse effects , Renal Insufficiency/chemically induced , Acute Kidney Injury/chemically induced , Acute Kidney Injury/complications , Aged , Diabetes Complications , Diatrizoate Meglumine/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infusions, Intravenous , Iohexol/administration & dosage , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk FactorsSubject(s)
Endothelins/blood , Heart Diseases/blood , Pulmonary Circulation/physiology , Adult , Aged , Female , Heart Diseases/physiopathology , Hemodynamics , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
This study describes a method for the performance of cardiac catheterization using 5 French preformed Judkins catheters from a percutaneous right brachial approach, and compares that technique to the more traditional percutaneous right femoral approach with 6 French catheters. One hundred consecutive patients requiring diagnostic left heart catheterization and selective coronary angiography were randomized according to femoral versus brachial arterial technique. Procedural efficiency, radiation exposure, and diagnostic film quality favored the femoral approach, while patient comfort, hemostasis time, time to ambulation, and decreased need for post-procedure nursing care favored the brachial approach. No differences were identified in complications. Cardiac catheterization from a right brachial artery percutaneous approach with 5 French preformed catheters has both advantages and disadvantages when compared with a more traditional femoral approach with 6 French catheters. Multiple factors should be considered before selecting an approach to diagnostic cardiac catheterization and each patient should be individually evaluated for determination of the optimal technique.
