4.7 Article

Renal toxicity evaluation and comparison between visipaque (iodixanol) and hexabrix (ioxaglate) in patients with renal insufficiency undergoing coronary angiography - The RECOVER study: A randomized controlled trial

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2006.06.047

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES This study sought to compare the nephrotoxicity of iodixanol and ioxaglate in patients with renal impairment undergoing coronary angiography. BACKGROUND lodixanol, a nonionic, dimeric, iso-osmolar contrast medium (IOCM), may be less nephrotoxic than low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM) in high-risk patients. METHODS In a prospective, randomized trial in 300 adults with creatinine clearance (CrCI) <= 60 ml/min, patients received either iodixanol or ioxaglate and underwent coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary end point was the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) (an increase in serum creatinine [SCr] >= 25% or >= 0.5 mg/dl [>= 44.2 mu mol/1]). The incidence of CIN in patients with severe renal impairment at baseline (CrCI < 30 ml/min) or diabetes and in those receiving large doses (>= 140 ml) of contrast medium was also determined. RESULTS The incidence of CIN was significantly lower with iodixanol (7.9%) than with ioxaglate (17.0%; p = 0.021), corresponding to an odds ratio (OR) of CIN of 0.415 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.194 to 0.889) for iodixanol. The incidence of CIN was also significantly lower with iodixanol in patients with severe renal impairment (p = 0.023) or concomitant diabetes (p = 0.041), or in patients given >= 140 ml of contrast media (p = 0.038). Multivariate analysis identified use of ioxaglate (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.11 to 6.33, p = 0.028), baseline SCr, mg/dl (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.85, p 0.038), and left ventricular ejection fraction, % (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.99, p = 0.019) as independent risk factors for CIN. CONCLUSIONS The IOCM iodixanol was significantly less nephrotoxic than ioxaglate, an ionic, dimeric LOCM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据