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

Hemodynamic effects of iodixanol and iohexol during ventriculography in patients with compromised left ventricular function

A crossover study was performed to compare the hemodynamic effects of the iso-osmolar contrast agent iodixanol (Visipaque) 320 mg I/ml to those of the low-osmolar iohexol (Omnipaque) 350 mg I/ml. The main hypothesis was that iodixanol and iohexol would affect left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) to different degrees. In 48 patients with reduced cardiac function (mean ejection fraction 33. 4%), one ventricular injection was performed with each contrast medium. Ventricular, aortic and right atrial pressures and heart rate were measured continuously. Cardiac output (using Fick's principle) and systemic vascular resistance were calculated. LVEDP increased with both agents, but significantly less after iodixanol than after iohexol (P < 0.01), also in subgroups of patients in whom baseline LVEDP was severely increased and in whom 3-vessel disease was present. Immediate changes in variables reflecting vasodilatation were similar with both agents. In conclusion, both contrast agents influenced hemodynamics during ventriculography, but iodixanol had significantly less influence on LVEDP than did iohexol.

Prevention and treatment of thromboembolic and ischemic complications associated with endovascular procedures: Part I--Pathophysiological and pharmacological features

Thromboembolic and ischemic complications frequently occur during and after endovascular procedures, because of associated arterial injury and the thrombogenic characteristics of arterial catheters, contrast agents, and implanted devices such as coils and stents. Platelet adhesion, activation, and aggregation occurring at the site of arterial injury are mediated by local factors, including thromboxane A2 (inhibited by aspirin) and adenosine diphosphate (inhibited by ticlopidine and clopidogrel). Concomitantly, thrombin is formed by serial activation of clotting factors via contact with subendothelial tissue factor. Thrombin cleaves fibrinogen into fibrin. Thrombin activation is indirectly blocked by heparin and its analogs. However, after thrombin is clot-bound (with fibrin), it is relatively protected from heparin and is effectively blocked only by direct thrombin inhibitors (hirudin and its analogs). The final common pathway in clot formation is the binding of fibrinogen to platelets via platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptors, which is inhibited by antibodies to platelet IIb/IIIa receptors. New treatment modalities, such as the use of direct thrombin inhibitors and antibodies to platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa, seem to be more effective for prophylaxis and treatment than conventional anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies.

Safety and criteria for selective use of low-osmolality contrast for cardiac angiography

OBJECTIVES

Recommendations to restrict low-osmolality contrast to high-risk patients having cardiac angiography have been challenged because of safety and uncertainty about selection criteria. The authors document frequency and severity of adverse events with diagnostic cardiac angiography under the influence of guidelines for selective use of low-osmolality contrast in high-risk patients and refine high-risk criteria.

METHODS

Subjects of this prospective cohort study were 7,448 unselected patients having diagnostic cardiac angiography in St. John's, Newfoundland or Ottawa, Ontario. Measures included prespecified risk factors, procedure, contrast, and adverse events such as death within 24 hours, myocardial infarction, stroke, arrhythmias, hypotension, and anaphylactoid reactions.

RESULTS

Patients were similar at both sites. Fourteen point two percent received low-osmolality nonionic agents in St. John's. Thirty-four point one percent received low-osmolality (mostly ionic) media in Ottawa. Overall adverse event rates were similar at both sites: death, 0.07%; myocardial infarction or stroke, 0.03%; moderate events, 2%; and mild events, 16.8%. Event rates were low in those given high-osmolality media: death, 0.02%; myocardial infarction or stroke, 0.24%; moderate events, 1.6%; and mild events, 18%. The risk with cardiogenic shock and prior severe reaction to contrast could not be examined, but otherwise only current heart failure and markers of recent ischemia were associated with events after high-osmolality media.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians, using guidelines, can identify high-risk patients and should be able to safely limit use of low-osmolality media to them.

Complications of cardiac angiography using low- or high-osmolality contrast agents in patients with left main coronary stenosis

Recently published guidelines suggest that, in view of cost concerns, low-osmolal contrast should be selectively used in patients at increased risk of experiencing a contrast-related complication during cardiac angiography. The suggested criteria include the presence of left main coronary disease. However, the presence of left main disease is not usually known prior to angiography. Contrast-related complications of cardiac angiography were therefore analyzed in a group of 111 clinically stable patients found to have left main coronary stenosis, to determine if use of low-osmolality contrast had any beneficial effect when compared to standard contrast. Data were gathered prospectively as part of a randomized controlled trial, and the subgroup of patients with left main disease was analyzed retrospectively. Complications were divided into minor, intermediate, and major categories. In the 58 patients who received high-osmolar contrast, there were 4 contrast-related minor reactions, 8 intermediate events requiring treatment, and 1 major adverse event. Among the 53 patients who received low-osmolar contrast, there were no minor reactions, 7 intermediate events requiring treatment, and no major adverse events. The only difference of borderline significance was in the incidence of minor reactions requiring no treatment (P = 0.05). Although small and therefore not definitive, this study suggests that 1) universal use of low-osmolar contrast agents would not be expected to eliminate the risk of contrast-related reactions to cardiac angiography; 2) the well-documented clinical differences between high- and low-osmolar contrast primarily involve mild reactions; and 3) standard high-osmolar contrast is reasonably safe in clinically stable patients with left main coronary stenosis. The results therefore are consistent with the notion that selective use of low-osmolar contrast only in unstable patients is safe and appropriate.

Beneficial impact of aorto-coronary graft markers on post-operative angiography

OBJECTIVE

When coronary and graft angiography is required for patients with prior coronary artery bypass (CAB) graft surgery, it is often difficult to localize the proximal aorto-coronary graft anastamosis. Our goal was to quantify the potential benefit during subsequent angiography if the proximal anastamosis is marked by an aorto-coronary graft marker at the time of CAB.

METHODS

Retrospective review of 414 angiograms that were performed for patients with prior CAB. Cohorts with an without graft markers were compared.

RESULTS

In the group with aorto-coronary graft markers and > or = 2 aorto-coronary grafts, there were significant reductions in fluoroscopy time (30.5%, p < 0.0001), contrast volume (21.7%, p < 0.0001), and numbers of angiographic catheters used (17.0%, p = 0.0001). If only one aorto-coronary graft was placed and marked, a trend toward reduced fluoroscopy time was observed (23.8%, p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the objective benefit supporting routine placement of circumferential aorto-coronary graft markers during CAB, particularly if > 1 graft is required.

Cardioangiography and the hemodynamic effects of iodixanol

Patient safety should be in focus when using contrast media (CM) in diagnostic and interventional cardiac procedures. Side-effects that occur during cardioangiography due to hemodynamic effects of CM include direct effects on the heart, effects on the systemic and pulmonary circulation, and effects on the blood volume. Although not a totally inert solution, iodixanol (Visipaque) has less pronounced direct inotropic effects on the heart than have other CM; its vasodilatory effects on peripheral arteries are smaller, and the increase in blood volume is smaller after administering iodixanol than after other CM. Thus, iodixanol represents a further step forward in terms of reducing side-effects during contrast-enhanced diagnostic and interventional cardiac procedures.

Unsuccessful pericardiocentesis for cardiac tamponade during angiocardiography with nonionic contrast material

Cardiac tamponade secondary to ventricular wall perforation is one of the possible complications of right-sided as well as left-sided cardiac catheterization. Ventriculography was performed on a patient with obstructive cardiomyopathy using a nonionic contrast medium. During the procedure, the right ventricle was accidentally perforated and the patient developed cardiac tamponade. Pericardiocentesis was unsuccessful and surgical drainage was needed after the patient developed progressive hemodynamic deterioration. At surgery, pericardial thrombus was found. We consider the reason for failure of pericardiocentesis was rapid coagulation of the extravasated blood in connection with nonionic contrast material.

Ionic contrast agent-mediated endothelial injury causes increased platelet deposition to vascular surfaces

Contrast agent-mediated endothelial injury may be clinically relevant to the development of acute thrombosis after coronary interventions. We sought to investigate the extent to which contrast agents increase platelet deposition by measuring deposition of indium-111 radiolabeled platelets in an isolated perfused rabbit carotid artery model. Carotid artery segments were perfused at physiologic temperature, pressure, and shear. Vessels were subjected to angioplasty or no angioplasty before exposure to either buffer, diatrizoate (high osmolal/ionic), ioxaglate (low osmolal/ionic), or ioversol (low osmolal/nonionic). Subsequent deposition of indium-111 radiolabeled platelets was quantified. In vessels without balloon angioplasty, platelet deposition (platelets/cm2) was 110,000 +/- 95,000 for buffer perfused vessels, 280,000 +/- 210,000 for vessels perfused with diatrizoate, 290,000 +/- 160,000 for vessels perfused with ioxaglate, and 130,000 +/- 98,000 for vessels perfused with ioversol. After balloon angioplasty, platelet deposition was 1,300,000 +/- 590,000 for buffer controls, 1,800,000 +/- 320,000 for diatrizoate-perfused vessels, 1,500,000 +/- 450,000 for ioxaglate-perfused vessels, and 1,000,000 +/- 180,000 for ioversol-perfused vessels. In vessels without balloon angioplasty, diatrizoate and ioxaglate increased platelet deposition 2.5-fold and 2.6-fold, respectively, relative to buffer-perfused vessels (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01), whereas no increase was seen with ioversol. After balloon angioplasty, diatrizoate increased platelet deposition 1.4-fold over control (p < 0.05), whereas ioxaglate and ioversol showed no statistically significant increase. We conclude that ionic contrast media may cause more endothelial injury and associated localized platelet deposition than nonionic contrast media. These findings may be relevant to coronary interventions, specifically with regard to acute closure and chronic restenosis.

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.

Effect of viscosity and iodine concentration of nonionic radiographic contrast media on coronary arteriography in patients

To assess the influence of viscosity and iodine concentration, three matched and standardized left coronary arteriograms were obtained in 20 patients using iopamidol (Isovue-370), ioversol (Optiray-320), and iohexol (Omnipaque-350). The order of contrast media was randomized and the administration of contrast was double-blinded. Quantitative densitometric angiographic evaluation of the coronary angiograms was performed in addition to independent operator qualitative assessment. The injection volume of iopamidol (5.4 +/- 1.0 ml) was slightly but significantly less than that of ioversol and iohexol (5.6 +/- 1.0 ml, 5.7 +/- 1.0 ml, both p less than 0.05). The calculated iodine concentration was also lower for ioversol (1.7 +/- 0.32 gm) than for iopamidol (1.98 +/- 0.35 gm) and iohexhol (1.9 +/- 0.35 gm, both p less than 0.05). There were significantly lower contrast syringe injection pressures for ioversol (6.6 +/- 0.8 atm) than for iopamidol (7.5 +/- 0.9 atm) and iohexol (7.2 +/- 1.1 atm, both p less than 0.05). The quantitative densitometric analysis failed to demonstrate significant differences among the contrast media with respect to image density parameters for any individual agent. All coronary angiograms were deemed of diagnostic quality. The data in this study indicated that although differences in iodine concentration exist among the three agents, operator compensation with more rapid contrast delivery (higher volume) and lower viscosity (lower injection pressure) produced equivalent image opacification during coronary angiography. Given the same incidence of adverse hemodynamic and clinical effects, selection of a low viscosity media theoretically provides an advantage during procedures using small diameter catheters or interventional procedures requiring contrast visualization through reduced catheter lumina.