Clinical Radiology
Volume 64, Issue 5 , Pages 468-472 , May 2009

Contrast-induced nephropathy: are there differences between low osmolar and iso-osmolar iodinated contrast media?

  • S.K. Morcos

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationGuarantor and correspondent: S. K. Morcos, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Northern General Hospital, Herries Road, Sheffield S5 7AU, UK. Tel.: +44 114 2714339; fax: +44 114 2611791.
    • Within the last 12 months the author has received consultancy and lectures fees from the following companies that manufacture contrast media: Bracco, Italy, Bayer Schering, Germany, and Guerbet, France. The authors also received a research grant from Guerbet.

Received 7 July 2008 ,Accepted 7 August 2008.

References 

  1. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK. Contrast-medium-induced nephropathy: is there a new consensus? A review of published guidelines. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:1835–1840
  2. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK. Contrast media and the kidney: European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) guidelines. Br J Radiol. 2003;76:513–518
  3. Mehran R, Nikolsky E. Contrast-induced nephropathy: definition, epidemiology, and patients at risk. Kidney Int. 2006;69:S11–S15
  4. Morcos SK. Prevention of contrast media nephrotoxicity following angiographic procedures. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005;16:13–23
  5. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK, Barrett BJ. Contrast-induced nephropathy: the wheel has turned 360 degrees. Acta Radiol. 2008;49:646–657
  6. Rudnick MR, Goldfarb S, Wexler L, et al. Nephrotoxicity of ionic and nonionic contrast media in 1196 patients: a randomised trial. Kidney Int. 1995;47:254–261
  7. Taliercio CP, Vlietstra RE, Ilstrup DM, et al. A randomised comparison of nephrotoxicity of iopamidol and diatrizoate in high risk patients undergoing cardiac angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:384–390
  8. Barrett B, Carlisle EJ. Meta-analysis of the relative nephrotoxicity of high- and low-osmolality iodinated contrast media. Radiology. 1998;188:171–178
  9. Sharma S, Kini A. Effect of nonionic radiocontrast agents on the occurrence of contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with mild-moderate chronic renal insufficiency: pooled analysis of the randomized trials. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;65:386–393
  10. Solomon R. The role of osmolality in the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy: a systematic review of angiographic contrast media in high risk patients. Kidney Int. 2005;68:2256–2263
  11. Solomon R, DuMouchel W. Contrast media and nephropathy. Findings from systematic analysis and Food and Drug Administration reports of adverse effects. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:651–660
  12. Chalmers N, Jackson RW. Comparison of iodixanol and iohexol in renal impairment. Br J Radiol. 1999;72:701–703
  13. Aspelin P, Aubry P, Fransson SG, et al. Nephrotoxic effects in high-risk patients undergoing angiography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:491–499
  14. Jo S-H, Youn T-J, Koo B-K, et al. Renal toxicity evaluation and comparison between Visipaque (iodixanol) and Hexabric (ioxaglate) in patients with renal insufficiency undergoing coronary angiography. The RECOVER study: a randomized, controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:924–930
  15. Solomon RJ, Natarajan MK, Doucet S, et al., The Investigators of the CARE Study  Cardiac Angiography in Renally Impaired Patients (CARE) Study. Randomized, double-blind trial of contrast-induced nephropathy in with chronic kidney disease. Circulation. 2007;115:3189–3196
  16. Ni J, Ruiyan Z, Jainsheng Z, et al. Safety of iso-osmolar nonionic dimer during percutaneous coronary intervention. [in Chinese] J Interv Radiol. 2006;15:327–329
  17. Briguori C, Colombo A, Airoldi F, et al. Nephrotoxicity of low-osmolality versus iso-osmolality contrast agents: impact of N-acetylcysteine. Kidney Int. 2005;68:2250–2255
  18. McCullough PA, Bertrand ME, Brinker JA, et al. A meta-analysis of the renal safety of isosmolar Visipaque compared with low-osmolar contrast media. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:692–699
  19. Barrett BJ, Katzberg RW, Thomsen HS, et al. Contrast induced nephropathy in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing computed tomography. A double blind comparison of Visipaque and Iopamidol. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:815–821
  20. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK, Erley CM, et al. Investigators in the Abdominal Computed Tomography: IOMERON 400 Versus VISIPAQUE 320 Enhancement (ACTIVE) Study. The ACTIVE Trial: comparison of the effects on renal function of iomeprol-400 and iodixanol-320 in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing abdominal computed tomography. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:170–178
  21. Kuhn MJ, Chen N, Sahani DV, et al. The PREDICT study: a randomized double-blind comparison of contrast-induced nephropathy after low- or isoosmolar contrast agent exposure. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:151–157
  22. Carraro M, Matalan F, Antonione P, et al. Effects of a dimeric vs a monomeric nonionic contrast medium on renal function in patients with mild to moderate renal insufficiency: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Eur Radiol. 1998;8:144–147
  23. Nguyen SA, Suranyi P, Ravenel JG, et al. Iso-osmolality versus low-osmolality iodinated contrast medium at intravenous contrast-enhanced CT: effect on kidney function. Radiology. 2008;248:97–105
  24. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557–560

PII: S0009-9260(08)00439-X

doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2008.08.019

Clinical Radiology
Volume 64, Issue 5 , Pages 468-472 , May 2009

Article Tools