Comparison of patient comfort between iodixanol and iopamidol in contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Previous clinical studies have shown that iso-osmolar iodixanol (Visipaque®) causes less patient discomfort than low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM) when administered via intra-arterial injection. No data are available comparing these agents for patient discomfort when administered intravenously (i.v.) using power injectors.

PURPOSE

To compare the frequency and intensity of patient discomfort between iodixanol and iopamidol (Isovue®) administered i.v. using a power injector in contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) of the abdomen and pelvis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of iodixanol 320 mg I/mL or iopamidol 370 mg I/mL on patient discomfort. The presence of discomfort (heat, pain, coldness) and intensity was verbally rated by patients on a 0-10 scale and converted into four categories (0, none; 1-3, mild; 4-7, moderate; 8-10, severe). Image quality was evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 299 evaluable patients enrolled at nine centers, 151 received iodixanol and 148 received iopamidol. The average age was 58 years. Iodixanol patients experienced significantly less moderate/severe discomfort (35.1% vs. 67.3%; P < 0.0001) or heat (29.8% vs. 63.9%; P < 0.0001), and severe discomfort (2.6% vs. 16.3%; P = 0.0004) or heat (2.6% vs. 15%; P = 0.0008), but three times more no discomfort (21.2% vs. 7.5%; P = 0.0008) than iopamidol patients. Excellent image quality was in 95.4% of iodixanol vs. 89.9% of iopamidol patients (P = 0.0508). Overall, adverse event (AE) rate excluding patient discomfort was 19.9% in the iodixanol group and 14.9% in the iopamidol group (P = 0.2870), but contrast-related AEs were comparable: 11.3% vs. 10.1% (P = 0.8522). Delayed skin reactions occurred in 2.6% of patients in the iodixanol group and in no patient in the iopamidol group (P = 0.1226).

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving iodixanol had significantly lower moderate-to-severe or severe discomfort than patients receiving iopamidol, with heat being the major contributor. Iodixanol use trended towards better image quality but the difference was not statistically significant. No significant differences in incidences of overall or contrast-related AEs or delayed skin reactions were seen between the two groups. These data support that CM osmolality may be a key determinant of patient discomfort.

Iodixanol Versus Low-Osmolar Contrast Media for Prevention of Contrast Induced Nephropathy

Background—

Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The objective of our meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of iodixanol compared with low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM) for prevention of CIN.

Methods and Results—

We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and internet sources of cardiology trial results for individual and relevant reviews of randomized, controlled trials, for the terms contrast media, contrast nephropathy, renal failure, iodixanol, Visipaque, and low-osmolar contrast media. All studies reported an incidence rate of CIN for each study group; there was no restriction on the definition of CIN. There were no restrictions on journal type or patient population. Overall, 36 trials were identified for analysis of aggregated summary data on 7166 patients; 3672 patients received iodixanol and 3494 patients received LOCM. Overall, iodixanol showed no statistically significant reduction in CIN incidence below that observed with heterogeneous comparator agents ( P =0.11). Analysis of patient subgroups revealed that there was a significant benefit of iodixanol when compared with iohexol alone (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.11 to 0.55; P <0.001) but not when compared with LOCM other than iohexol or with other ionic dimers or among patients receiving intra-arterial contrast injections or among patients undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous intervention.

Conclusions—

Analysis of aggregated summary data from multiple randomized, controlled trials of iodixanol against diverse LOCMs for heterogeneous procedures and definitions of CIN show an iodixanol-associated reduction that is suggestive but statistically nonsignificant.

Contrast medium use

Various properties of iodinated contrast media (osmolality, ionic versus nonionic, and viscosity) may contribute to contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). Therefore, the choice of contrast medium affects the risk for CIN. There is good evidence that low-osmolar contrast media are less nephrotoxic than high-osmolar contrast media in patients at increased risk for CIN who receive intra-arterial iodinated contrast. Current evidence suggests that nonionic isosmolar contrast presents the lowest risk for CIN in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), particularly in those patients with diabetes mellitus. Intra-arterial administration of contrast media may be associated with a greater risk for CIN above that observed with intravenous administration. The use of gadolinium or CO(2) as alternative contrast media to avoid the risk of nephrotoxicity cannot be substantiated by clinical trials and therefore cannot be recommended. Most studies show that, within a class, higher volumes (>100 mL) of iodinated contrast medium are associated with a higher risk for CIN. However, in patients at high risk, such as those with CKD and diabetes, even small volumes of contrast medium can have adverse effects on renal function.

Selection of contrast media

The pathophysiologic mechanisms of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) have been reviewed by Persson and Tepel. They focus on the renal response to contrast media (CM). In this section, we focus on the CM itself. Aspects of importance with regard to CIN include the route of administration, the volume of CM, the manner of X-ray attenuation, and the specific chemical structure of the CM.

A Meta-Analysis of the Renal Safety of Isosmolar Iodixanol Compared With Low-Osmolar Contrast Media

OBJECTIVES

We sought to compare the nephrotoxicity of isosmolar contrast medium (IOCM) iodixanol with low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM) and to identify predictors of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN).

BACKGROUND

Contrast-induced nephropathy is a serious complication of diagnostic and interventional procedures.

METHODS

Pooled individual patient data (n = 2,727) from 16 double-blind, randomized, controlled trials in which patients received either intra-arterial IOCM iodixanol (n = 1,382) or LOCM (n = 1,345) were included. Patients were stratified according to chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes mellitus (DM), or both. Outcome measures were the maximum increase in serum creatinine (Cr) over baseline and the incidence of postprocedural CIN.

RESULTS

The maximum Cr increase within 3 days after contrast medium (CM) administration was significantly smaller in the iodixanol group compared with the LOCM group (0.06 mg/dl vs. 0.10 mg/dl, p < 0.001), particularly in patients with CKD (0.07 mg/dl vs. 0.16 mg/dl, p = 0.004) and CKD + DM (0.10 mg/dl vs. 0.33 mg/dl, p = 0.003). Contrast-induced nephropathy, defined as an increase in Cr > or =0.50 mg/dl within 3 days after CM administration, occurred less frequently in the iodixanol group than in the LOCM group in all patients (1.4% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001), in CKD patients (2.8% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.001), and in CKD + DM patients (3.5% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.003). Independent predictors of CIN included CKD, CKD + DM, and use of LOCM.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of pooled data from 2,727 patients indicates that use of the IOCM iodixanol is associated with smaller rises in Cr and lower rates of CIN than LOCM, especially in patients with CKD or CKD + DM.

Cost-effectiveness of iodixanol in patients at high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy

BACKGROUND

Acute renal failure after contrast-induced nephropathy is a clinically important and costly complication after the use of iodine-based contrast media. We investigated the cost and cost-effectiveness of 2 contrast media in patients at high risk of contrast-induced nephropathy.

METHODS

The analyses were based on a randomized, prospective, multinational clinical study comparing the nephrotoxic effects of an isosmolar nonionic contrast medium, iodixanol, with those of a low-osmolar nonionic contrast medium, iohexol. Resource utilization data were obtained from the study and from a retrospective review of patients' hospital records. Swedish, German, and French unit prices were applied to resources used. Between-group differences in average costs were analyzed using a nonparametric bootstrap method.

RESULTS

Resource utilization data for 125 patients were analyzed. Seven contrast media-related serious adverse reactions, of which 6 were acute renal failures, were noted in 6 patients receiving iohexol. Two patients in the iodixanol group had 1 nonserious reaction each. The mean hospitalization cost per patient was Euros 489, Euros 573, and Euros 393 lower after iodixanol than after iohexol using Swedish, German, and French unit prices, respectively. The mean per-patient costs of treating adverse drug reactions were Euros 371, Euros 399, and Euros 445 lower after iodixanol than after iohexol, using the respective unit prices (P < or = 0.01). Iodixanol was cost-effective compared with iohexol, with both lower costs and better effects related to fewer adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

The isosmolar contrast medium iodixanol appears to be cost-effective when compared with a low-osmolar contrast medium, iohexol, in diabetic patients with renal impairment undergoing angiography.

Renal artery stenosis in minority patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization: prevalence and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (RAS) is a frequently overlooked clinical entity that can cause progressive renal failure and uncontrolled hypertension. Revascularization of a stenosed renal artery is associated with improved clinical outcomes including the prevention of renal failure. Thus, it is important to recognize all potential candidates for renal artery revascularization. In a general population referred for diagnostic cardiac catheterization, RAS of any severity was found in 30% of patients and significant stenosis (> or = 50% diameter narrowing) was found in 15% of patients. The number of minority groups is increasing in the US population, and RAS in this population is not well investigated. Our purpose was to determine the prevalence and risk factors associated with RAS in minority patients referred for diagnostic cardiac catheterization.

METHODS

Abdominal aortography was performed in 171 consecutive minority patients referred for diagnostic cardiac catheterization (hispanics = 115, African Americans = 56). The association of clinical and angiographic variables with RAS was examined using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Renal artery stenosis of any severity was identified in 13.5% of patients (unilateral 7.7%, bilateral 5.8%). Significant RAS was found in 7.7% of patients (unilateral 4.8%, bilateral 2.9%). Independent predictors of RAS included age (mean +/-1SD, 68 +/-10 vs 57 +/-12 yr, P < 0.001, for patients with vs without RAS), coronary artery disease, and elevated serum creatinine levels (> 115 micromol/L). Race/ethnicity (hispanics vs African Americans), sex, smoking, congestive heart failure, diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, and hypertension were not independent predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Renal artery stenosis in minority patients undergoing diagnostic cardiac catheterization is less common than reported in white patients, is similar in hispanics and African Americans, and is similar in women and men. The clinical and angiographic features are helpful in predicting its presence.

Influence of the viscosity of iodixanol on medullary and cortical blood flow in the rat kidney: a potential cause of Nephrotoxicity

The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of four iodinated contrast media on cortical, inner medullary and outer medullary blood flow in the rat kidney by using laser-Doppler flowmetry. The high-osmolar contrast medium diatrizoate did not significantly modify medullary perfusion but moderately decreased the cortical blood flow when injected at a dose of 1600 mg iodine kg(-1). Similar effects were obtained with the low-osmolar contrast media ioxaglate and iobitridol. In contrast, the new iso-osmolar contrast medium iodixanol induced a dose-dependent reduction of perfusion in all regions tested. This effect was accompanied by concomitant hypotension. The reduction of inner medullary and cortical blood flow induced by iodixanol was partially alleviated by heating the solution prior to injection and subsequently reducing its viscosity. In the outer medulla, however, this procedure did not improve blood flow. These results suggest that lowering the viscosity may palliate the harmful effects of iodixanol on the inner medulla and cortex, but may not protect the outer medulla from hypoxic injury.

High-volume nonionic dimeric contrast medium: first experiences during complex coronary interventions

Interventional cardiology is a rapidly developing field of medicine with annually increasing numbers of coronary interventions. Especially through the development of alternative techniques for coronary angioplasty, new indications have been found and more difficult lesions are tackled. Inevitably, such complex interventions are time-consuming and require high amounts of contrast medium. Newer, mostly nonionic agents have been developed with improved tolerability as well as fewer cardiac and renal side effects due to their nonionic, hydrophilic structure, and their osmolality isotonic to plasma. This study sought to investigate the effects of high-volume nonionic, dimeric contrast medium during coronary interventions with special emphasis on renal and hemodynamic side effects during routine hospital stays. Retrospectively, 25 consecutive patients (age 56 +/- 10 yr) with normal renal and cardiac function receiving > 500 ml of the nonionic dimeric contrast medium iodixanol during complex coronary interventions were analyzed. The analysis was based on serum creatinine levels 1 day before and 2 days after contrast medium administration for the monitoring of renal function. Additionally, heart rate and left ventricular pressures were evaluated before and after left ventricular angiography. Mean serum creatinine rose from 0.9 +/- 0.2 mg/dl to 1.1 +/- 0.2 mg/dl (P < 0.05) after 2 days of coronary intervention. Heart rate, left ventricular systolic pressure, and left ventricular end-diastolic pressure did not change significantly. No major side effects were encountered in the short follow-up period of 2 days. Based on this retrospective analysis, high-volume nonionic, dimeric contrast medium administration in patients without preexisting renal insufficiency is associated with little impairment of renal function, and has only minor hemodynamic and general side effects. Iodixanol 320 mg I/ml is well-tolerated and effective for the use of cardioangiography. Given the limitations of this retrospective analysis, future prospective studies should systematically address the effects of high-volume contrast medium administration in otherwise healthy patients as well as in high-risk patients undergoing coronary interventions.

Neural tolerability of iodixanol in mice and dogs after single and repeated intracisternal administration

The neural tolerability of iodixanol has been assessed in studies in mice and dogs. The animals received up to 4 injections in the cisterna cerebellomedullaris while under light anesthesia. Iotrolan was included as a reference study in 1 study. The observations comprised assessment of clinical behavior, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, hematology, clinical chemistry and/or macroscopic and microscopic examination at necropsy. In addition, the repeated-dose dog study, urinalysis and opthalmoscopy were performed, electrocardiograms obtained, and respiratory rate, blood pressure and rectal temperature measured. Clinical signs and minor pathological changes caused by the injection procedures were seen in all studies in some animals treated with iodixanol as well as in control animals. Single (2.0 g I/kg) and repeated (0.960 g I/kg) intracisternal administration of iodixanol to mice caused no significant toxicological effects. Two dogs treated with a high dose of iodixanol (0.256 g I/kg; 0.8 ml/kg) had pathological changes (meningeal inflammation and/or necrosis) that were more severe than those observed in control dogs. Single and repeated intracisternal administration of 0.128 g I/kg (0.4 ml/kg) of iodixanol to dogs, however, caused no significant toxicological effects. Apart from the findings in the 2 dogs, the neurological and neuropathological changes elicited by iodixanol were similar to those induced by control or reference substances. The results from these intracisternal toxcity studies in mice and dogs indicate a significant margin of safety regarding the use of iodixanol in clinical intra-thecal indications.

Tissue reaction follwing intratracheal application of roentgen contrast media in rats

Contrast media (CM) given orally for roentgen examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract may inadvertently enter the lungs. The present paper describes the local effects on the lungs of rats after a single intratracheal instillation of the nonionic, iso-osmolar, dimer CM iodixanol and iotrolan, and the ionic hyperosmolar, monomeric CM diatrizoate. Hydrochloric acid (HCl) and saline were included as positive and negative controls, respectively. The test compounds were given by intratracheal instillation to anesthetized rats at low dose volumes of 0.5 ml/kg b.w. The animals were killed 6 hours, 24 hours or 7 days after dosing, and the trachea and lungs subjected to histopathological examination. Acute signs of dyspnea were observed in 7 out of 15 animals that received HCl. No clinical signs could be related to treatment with any of the CM. Histomorphological assessment of the respiratory tract did not reveal any CM-related adverse effects, whereas animals treated with HCl showed marked histopathological changes. The results indicate that accidental exposure of the respiratory system to iodixanol, iotrolan or diatrizoate is unlikely to cause any significant tissue damage or lead to respiratory complications.

Main results of the first comparative clinical studies on Visipaque

The results are reviewed from 18 European clinical vascular studies in 1950 patients where iodixanol (Visipaque) - a new isotonic, dimeric, nonionic contrast medium (CM) - is compared to other CM. Visipaque gave better patient comfort, i.e., less pain and heat sensation after vascular injections than the comparative CM. Adverse events reported after Visipaque were otherwise similar to nonionic CM but lower than after ioxaglate (Hexabrix) and other ionic CM. Human renal safety of Visipaque has been extensively studied. Only small changes in glomerular filtration rate and serum creatinine were measured with the monomeric nonionic CM as well as with Visipaque. The excretion of marker enzymes for renal tubular cell function was generally lowest for Visipaque. Thus Visipaque was highly tolerable in the kidneys. To study cardiac safety, electrophysiological and hemodynamic changes were recorded. Visipaque had generally no electrophysiological or hemodynamic effects, or less pronounced effects compared to the other CM. Radiograms revealed that Visipaque 320 mg I/ml yielded the same attenuation as 350 to 370 mg I/ml of the other CM and, similarly, 270 mg I/ml of Visipaque gave as good visualization as 300 mg I/ml of comparative CM.

Nephrotoxic risks of renal angiography: contrast media-associated nephrotoxicity and atheroembolism--a critical review

Renal angiography remains the "gold standard" procedure for the detection of renal artery stenosis. However, clinicians often avoid renal angiography because of fears of contrast media-associated nephrotoxicity (CM-AN) and atheroembolism. This review focuses on these potential angiographic complications, with particular emphasis, in the case of CM-AN, on clinical features, incidence, risk factors with an emphasis on pre-existing renal insufficiency and diabetes mellitus, volume of contrast media, low osmolar versus high osmolar contrast media, and prophylaxis. For atheroembolism, areas emphasized are pathology, clinical features, precipitating features, and incidence in various settings. Although the literature contains an abundance of information about CM-AN and atheroembolism, this review identified multiple areas of uncertainty regarding features of both of these complications. For example, additional studies are needed to determine the incidence of CM-AN, both asymptomatic and clinically severe, in patients with a wide range of pre-existing renal insufficiency with and without diabetes mellitus, following low volume digital subtraction renal angiography with low osmolar contrast media. In a similar manner, studies are needed with adequate postcontrast observation periods to determine the true incidence of clinically significant atheroembolism following diagnostic renal angiography and angioplasty and techniques that may modify this complication. Until further knowledge in both of these areas is available, it is difficult to precisely determine the risks of renal angiography and/or angioplasty in the azotemic patient suspected of or having renal ischemic disease using modern radiologic techniques.