Hemodynamic effects of contrast media during coronary angiography: a comparison of three nonionic agents to Hypaque-76

Thrombogenic potential of contrast media in an experimental model of laser-induced thrombosis

Controversy still exists about the pro- or antithrombotic side effects of contrast media used in daily medical practice. Recent reports have shown that various contrast media, including ionic compounds, have deleterious prothrombotic actions. A new evaluation of these adverse side effects is reported here, with the study of the dose-effect relationship. Two ionic (ioxaglate and diatrizoate) and two non-ionic contrast media (iopamidol and iohexol) were studied. Experiments were done on 22 groups of 5 Wistar male rats each, using a Laser Argon-induced thrombosis model in mesenteric microvessels. Three parameters were studied: the number of laser beams needed to induce platelet thrombus formation, the number of emboli, and the duration of embolization. Platelet count and platelet aggregation also were determined. Iopamidol and iohexol induced a significant rise in both the number of emboli and the duration of embolization in mesenteric microvessels at doses up to 1 mL/kg. Ioxaglate and diatrizoate also significantly increased these parameters at doses up to 2 mL/kg. All the products tested decreased platelet count, inducing a -17 to -30% variation from control values. Diatrizoate and ioxaglate inhibited platelet aggregation, while iopamidol and Iohexol behaved as activators. All non-ionic, and to a lesser extent, all ionic contrast media demonstrated prothrombotic properties.

Thrombogenicity of ionic and nonionic contrast media tested in a laser induced rat thrombosis model

Contrast media are used as substances for visualization of vascular system. But, their administration is often associated with thromboembolic complications. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the thrombogenic action of ionic and non-ionic contrast media on thrombus formation. The experimental destruction of endothelial cells by Laser injury leads to thrombus and emboli formation. Two ionic and two non-ionic contrast media were injected intravenously via penis vein and tested at various dosages (1.0 and 2.5 ml/kg) 5, 30, 45 and 65 minutes after injection. The administration of these contrast media decreases the number of Laser injuries required to induce thrombus formation, increases the number of emboli which detached from thrombus and prolongs duration of embolization (p < or = 0.05). These experimental results suggest that ionic and non-ionic contrast media induce thrombogenic effects. This thrombogenicity was the greatest for non-ionic contrast media. It was observed the decrease of the white cells, red cells and platelets.

Clinical significance and predisposing factors to symptomatic bradycardia and hypotension after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty

Of 180 consecutive patients who underwent uneventful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), 25 (13.9%) had at least 1 episode of symptomatic bradycardia and hypotension during the early postprocedure period. Symptomatic bradycardia and hypotension occurred 1 to 10 hours (mean 4 +/- 2) after PTCA. A higher incidence of symptomatic bradycardia and hypotension was found in patients receiving regular treatment with beta blockers (26% vs 10% in patients without beta blockers in their regimen, p < 0.01), diltiazem or verapamil (20% vs 9%, p < 0.025), or both a beta blocker and diltiazem or verapamil (64% vs 11%, p < 0.001). A higher incidence was also associated with angioplasty of the left anterior descending coronary artery compared with angioplasty of the other coronary arteries (22% vs 8%, p < 0.01). It is concluded that symptomatic bradycardia and hypotension is a common occurrence after PTCA. The incidence is higher after PTCA to the left anterior descending coronary artery and in patients receiving diltiazem, verapamil, and beta-blocking agents; it is particularly high in patients receiving a combination of a beta-blocking agent and either diltiazem or verapamil.

Comparative trial of Omnipaque 350 (iohexol) and Telebrix 350 (sodium-meglumine-ioxithalamate) in left ventriculography and coronary arteriography

In a double-blind randomized trial, the hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects of the low-osmolar nonionic contrast medium iohexol (Omnipaque) and the standard high-osmolar ionic monomer sodium-meglumine-ioxithalamate (Telebrix) at left ventricular angiography and selective coronary arteriography were evaluated. Sixty patients were divided into two groups of 30 patients; one group received Omnipaque in a dosage of 350 mgI/ml and the other group received Telebrix in a dosage of 350 mgI/ml. The Omnipaque showed significantly less effects on heart rate and myocardial contractility, and induced less electrophysiological changes than did Telebrix. However, there was a significant increase of 10% in the diameter of the left coronary artery following selective coronary injection with Telebrix, while Omnipaque induced practically no change in vessel diameter. All hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects proved to be short-lasting. We conclude that ionic and nonionic agents are similarly efficacious in providing adequate images with minimal risk to the patient. However, the nonionic agents exert slightly more alterations in cardiac hemodynamics and in electrocardiographic intervals. The vasodilatory effect on coronary artery diameter by Telebrix may entail a more rapid clearance of contrast medium from the coronary circulation, which might be of some advantage over nonionic contrast media.

Adverse reactions of low osmolality contrast media during cardiac angiography: a prospective randomized multicenter study

A multicenter study was performed to determine the incidence of adverse reactions to two contrast media with similar low osmolality during cardiac angiography. The study was of a randomized double-blind design comparing ioxaglate (an ionic dimer) and iopamidol (a nonionic compound) and included 500 patients; 250 patients received ioxaglate and 250 iopamidol. There were 58 adverse reactions attributed to the contrast media in the ioxaglate group and 29 in the iopamidol group (p less than 0.001). Chest pain occurred in 11 patients in the ioxaglate group compared with 5 in the iopamidol group (p = 0.123). Nausea or vomiting was present in 20 and 2 patients, respectively (p less than 0.0003). Allergic adverse reactions, such as bronchospasm, urticaria and itching, occurred in 15 of the ioxaglate group and only 1 of the patients receiving iopamidol (p less than 0.0007). Fifty-two patients in the ioxaglate group had a known allergic history (not to contrast medium) or asthma, whereas 77 receiving iopamidol had a similar history. Seven of the 52 ioxaglate-treated patients developed an allergic adverse reaction compared with none of the 77 in the iopamidol group (p = 0.001). Of 41 patients receiving ioxaglate who were premedicated with diphenhydramine, 4 had an allergic adverse event. In the iopamidol group 45 patients received similar premedication and none had an allergic adverse reaction (p less than 0.03). Thus, this multicenter study shows that adverse reactions occur more often with ioxaglate than with iopamidol and that patients with an allergic history have a greater risk with ioxaglate therapy compared with iopamidol.

The effects of ionic and nonionic radiographic contrast media on coronary hyperemia in patients during coronary angiography

The purpose of this study was to compare the differential effects of ionic, high-osmolar meglumine diatrizoate; ionic, low-osmolar ioxaglate meglumine; and nonionic, low-osmolar iohexol (all radiographic contrast agents) on coronary blood flow velocity and hyperemic responses during diagnostic coronary angiography. Coronary flow velocity and arterial pressure were measured at baseline and during maximal hyperemia after contrast media were randomly injected (4 to 6 ml into left coronary artery) in 22 patients with the use of a Judkins-style 20 MHz Doppler-tipped angiographic catheter. Contrast media-induced hyperemic responses were compared to those induced with intracoronary nitroglycerin (200 micrograms) and papaverine (10 mg). There were no significant differences in systolic, diastolic, or mean arterial pressure measurements among the three contrast agents. The increase in mean coronary flow velocity during hyperemia was 118 +/- 93%, 133 +/- 73%, and 136 +/- 86% for iohexol, ioxaglate meglumine, and diatrizoate, respectively (p = NS among agents vs 264 +/- 109% for papaverine; p less than 0.05 for all). Coronary vasodilatory reserve (calculated as the ratio of hyperemic to basal mean flow velocity) was also similar among agents. It was comparable to the coronary vasodilatory reserve with nitroglycerin (2.1 +/- 1.0 to 2.2 +/- 1.1) and significantly less than that with papaverine (3.3 +/- 2.2, p less than 0.05). These data indicate that the clinical advantages of nonionic or low-osmolar contrast media are not mechanistically related to significant attenuation of the coronary hyperemic response.

Preliminary European intravenous clinical experience with a new, low osmolar, nonionic contrast medium: ioversol (Optiray)

The intravenous clinical trial program of ioversol (Optiray), a low osmolar, nonionic, monomeric contrast agent characterized by high hydrophilicity, is evaluated on the basis of results from the first clinical trials conducted in Europe as part of the development of the 300 and 350 mgI/ml formulations: 7 double-blind, comparative trials and 5 single trials were performed in a total of 743 patients, of whom 472 received ioversol and 271 a monomeric nonionic reference product. The diagnostic efficacy of ioversol was equivalent or superior to that of the reference products and tolerance was comparable to that of nonionic agents in terms of pain and heat sensations. No significant difference in adverse reactions was found and all the contrast agents studied were well tolerated by the patients.

Choice of contrast agents for cardiac angiography: review and recommendations based on clinically important distinctions

Low osmolal contrast agents (LOCA) are measurably superior to high osmolal contrast agents (HOCA) in a number of properties. However, LOCA are substantially more expensive than HOCA, and universal use of LOCA for cardiac angiography would strain the health care budget. Therefore, the choice to use LOCA in place of HOCA should be based on clinically important differences. Review of available published data suggests that HOCA can be used safely and effectively for cardiac angiography in patients with mild or moderately severe heart disease. When HOCA are used, those that do not bind calcium should be chosen as they cause fewer clinically important adverse reactions than those that do bind calcium. Use of LOCA may offer added safety in high risk patients, although to date, this conclusion has not been proved with clinical experience. Nonionic LOCA may be safer to use than ionic LOCA.

Ionic versus nonionic contrast use

It has taken many years of research, development and intense scientific investigation to produce intravascular contrast media. Research on relations between chemical structure, animal toxicity, and water-solubility has produced a number of highly water-soluble, iodinated compounds for use in diagnostic radiology as intravascular contrast agents. The currently used intravascular agents may be classified into four groups according to their chemical structure: 1. Ionic monomers 2. Ionic monoacid dimers 3. Nonionic monomers 4. Nonionic dimers It is the objective of this publication to review the history and development of intravascular contrast media as well as their properties, general effects and clinical use. The four types of contrast media differ significantly in their chemical structure and physico-chemical properties, and these differences determine their osmotoxicity, chemotoxicity, and ion toxicity. We analyze the organ specific toxic effects of intravascular contrast media upon the central nervous system, the cardiovascular system, and the renal system. We also review the secondary effects, clinical manifestations, and the incidence of adverse events associated with different types of contrast. The choice of contrast media has become critical since the introduction of nonionic agents because their toxicological and pharmacological properties differ from those of the ionic agents. The application of basic concepts involved in the use of contrast media in excretory urography, computed tomography, angiography, and angiocardiography is discussed, and the advantages of the use of nonionic contrast agents are outlined. Economic and ethical issues are presented with emphasis upon strategies to reduce the risk associated with the injection of intravascular contrast and to curtail consumption according to rational principles of use.

Effect of heparin in nonionic contrast media on blood coagulation and its dose response curve

To investigate the local effect of heparin on blood clot formation and partial thromboplastin time (PTT), blood was withdrawn into the catheters filled with iopamidol and heparin at 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 U per ml concentrations as debubbling. After 30 min incubation, blood clotting was observed in all 8 experiments with heparin concentrations of 0 and 1 U per ml; in 3 of 8 with 2 U per ml; and in none with greater than or equal to 3 U per ml. PTT of blood and contrast mixture in catheters increased significantly when heparin concentrations were increased from 2 to 3 U per ml and reached a level of greater than 110 sec at 5 or more U per ml. Thus, the addition of heparin to nonionic contrast media at concentrations of 5 U per ml may be an easy measure with which to prevent blood clotting and reduce thromboembolic complications during coronary arteriography.

Cardiovascular effects of iodinated contrast agents

The ideal intravascular contrast agent would be biologically inert and have no pharmacologic actions. Pharmacologic actions of currently used radiographic contrast agents are determined principally by 3 physicochemical properties of the iodine-bearing molecule and its formulation: osmolality, sodium concentration and calcium-binding properties. Within this framework, the calcium-binding 1.5 ratio agents have the most marked effects, and the 3.0 ratio nonionic agents the least, with the noncalcium-binding formulations of 1.5 ratio agents and ioxaglate (the only 3.0 ratio ionic agent) in between. Differences in hemodynamic effects are predominantly related to osmolality with the 3.0 agents causing less hemodynamic disturbance. The magnitude of difference is small enough that the 3.0 ratio agents have no important clinical advantage when used in patients with good or moderately impaired left ventricular function. However, the difference may be important in patients with severely impaired circulatory performance. The principal electrophysiologic differences are between the calcium-binding 1.5 ratio agents (which are associated with a clear-cut greater frequency of ventricular fibrillation during coronary injection than the noncalcium-binding 1.5 ratio agents) and the 3.0 ratio agents. There is no justification for the use of calcium-binding 1.5 ratio agents, since noncalcium-binding formulations of the same molecule are available at the same price. The circulatory reserve of most patients makes the differences between 3.0 ratio agents and noncalcium-binding 1.5 ratio agents clinically unimportant. In view of the substantial price disparity between 1.5 ratio and 3.0 ratio agents, noncalcium-binding 1.5 ratio agents are appropriate for patients with good circulatory performance and 3.0 ratio agents are best reserved for patients with impaired circulatory performance.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Selection of a contrast agent in the cardiac catheterization laboratory

The evolution of contrast material for intravascular use has been directed toward the development of better-tolerated agents. Currently, a variety of such "dyes" are available for coronary angiography and left ventriculography. Considerable animal and human investigation suggests that significant differences exist between the families of contrast agents that relate to patient tolerance. The newer low osmolality agents (especially the nonionic agents) produce less perturbation of the homeostatic state, which is clinically manifested by a lessened incidence of side effects, including those of a hemodynamic and electrophysiologic nature. While controversy continues over the cost/benefit ratio of the low osmolality contrast agents compared to traditional high osmolality agents, the former are rapidly becoming the community standard for diagnostic and especially therapeutic cardiologic procedures. Accepting the advantages of the low osmolality contrast agents, differences between the ionic dimers and the nonionic agents have been examined. Both experimental and clinical data suggest superiority of the nonionic agents. Although controversy still surrounds the issue of thromboembolism with the nonionic agents, accumulating evidence fails to support a clinically significant relation. The choice of contrast material is the responsibility of the invasive cardiologist. While the benefits of low osmolality agents are most obvious in high-risk patients, experience with large-scale intravenous studies suggests that the choice of contrast agent is a better discriminator of adverse reaction than is preprocedural risk stratification.

Atrial natriuretic peptide response to ionic and nonionic contrast left ventriculography

Atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) levels were measured prior to and at 1 and 5 minutes postcontrast left ventriculography with an ionic contrast agent (diatrizoate), and a nonionic agent (iopamidol) and the results were compared. Since ionic contrast agents have been found to cause an increase in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) and nonionic agents have been found to have less of an effect on LVEDP, we investigated the response of ANP levels, which have been found to increase secondary to increased LVEDP (atrial pressure), with both agents. A group of 38 patients who were scheduled for left heart catheterization for suspected coronary artery disease was included (19 in each group) and blood samples for ANP levels were drawn from the left ventricles. At the same time, heart rate, LVEDP, and left ventricular systolic pressure (LVSP) were also measured. It was found that the LVEDP increased significantly for both agents at 1 minute postventriculography, but no further change occurred at 5 min. Heart rate increased significantly in the diatrizoate group at 1 minute with a return of heart rate to preventriculography levels at 5 min, while the ANP level and LVSP remained unchanged at 1 minute postventriculography with both agents but increased significantly at 5 min in the diatrizoate group only. This difference in ANP response is not correlated with the LVEDP. The response of ANP may be related to heart rate and/or LVSP.

Hemodynamic abnormalities during coronary angiography: comparison of Hypaque-76, Hexabrix, and Omnipaque-350

The hemodynamic effects induced by coronary angiography in dogs with low osmolar ionic dimer Hexabrix (HB) and nonionic Omnipaque-350 (OM) were compared to the standard ionic contrast medium, Hypaque-76 (H76), both in the normal heart and in one with simulated severe cardiac disease. Left coronary angiography was performed in 12 "normal" closed-chest dogs with 10-cc injections of H76, HB, and OM in a randomized, blinded fashion. The maximal change in the left ventricular (LV) systolic pressure (SP), mean aortic pressure (MAP), left ventricular end diastolic pressure (LVEDP), and LV dp/dt were recorded. The LVSP and MAP fell 30 +/- 3 mm Hg and 26 +/- 4 mm Hg with H76, 22 +/- 2 mm Hg and 19 +/- 2 mm Hg with HB, and 7 +/- 1.5 mm Hg and 5 +/- 1 mm Hg with OM (P less than .001). The LVEDP increased 4.8 +/- 0.5 mm Hg with H76, 3 +/- 0.5 mm Hg with HB, but only 0.2 mm Hg with OM (P less than .001). The LV dp/dt decreased 392 +/- 63 mm Hg/sec with H76 and 235 +/- 21 mm Hg/sec with HB, but increased 411 +/- 50 mm Hg with OM (P less than .001). In eight additional open-chest dogs, left coronary angiography was performed 1 hr after occlusion of the proximal LAD coronary artery and in the presence of a critical circumflex coronary artery (CX) stenosis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

The potential risk of thrombosis during coronary angiography using nonionic contrast media

The influence of contrast media on coagulation has an important association with thromboembolic complication during coronary angiography. In this study, whole blood was methodically mixed with nonionic contrast medium, Iohexol (IOH), conventional ionic contrast medium, Hypaque-76 (H76), and low osmolar ionic dimer Hexabrix (HB) in vitro. The thrombotic propensity of contrast agents can be evaluated by measuring the clot formation of the mixtures. The experiments were repeated with whole blood after systemic heparinization. In the in vitro study, 5 ml of canine (N = 10) and 3 ml of human (N = 11) whole blood was incubated for 30 min in glass tubes with equal volumes of IOH, H76, HB, and 0.9% NaCl before heparinization. Clot formation with IOH and 0.9% NaCl were seen both in dogs (4.0 +/- 0.7 gm and 5.6 +/- 0.8 gm) and in patients (1.4 +/- 0.9 gm and 2.9 +/- 1.3 gm), whereas no clot was seen with H76 or XB. Following heparinization, no clot was visualized in any mixture of whole blood with contrast media or 0.9% NaCl. Similar results were observed in the catheter-syringe system with canine blood (N = 11) mixed with the contrast agents. Blood clots found in 15 min and 30 min of IOH were 0.07 +/- 0.08 gm and 0.44 +/- 0.20 gm (P less than 0.01) and of NaCl were 0.29 +/- 0.37 gm and 0.69 +/- 0.38 gm (P less than 0.01).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)