4.7 Article

A rapid protocol for the prevention of contrast - Induced renal dysfunction: the RAPPID study

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 41, 期 12, 页码 2114-2118

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00487-X

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES This study was designed to test a rapid protocol of intravenous acetylcysteine for prevention of radiocontrast-induced nephropathy (RCIN). BACKGROUND Oral acetylcysteine (NAC) may provide better prophylaxis against RCIN than intravenous (IV) hydration alone. Current protocols preclude prophylaxis of same-day or emergency patients owing to the need for prolonged pretreatment. METHODS We prospectively randomized 80 patients with stable renal dysfunction undergoing cardiac catheterization/intervention to a rapid protocol of IV NAC (150 mg/kg in 500 ml N/saline over 30 min immediately before contrast followed by 50 mg/kg in 500 ml N/saline over 4 h, n = 41, 67 +/- 10 years, 90% men) or IV hydration (1 ml/kg/h N/saline for 12 h pre- and post-contrast, n = 39, 71 +/- 8.8 years, 85% men). RESULTS Radiocontrast-induced nephropathy occurred in 2 of the 41 patients in the NAC group (5%) and in 8 of the 39 patients in the hydration group (21%; p = 0.045; relative risk: 0.28; 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.98). In the NAC group, mean serum creatinine fell from 1.85 +/- 0.59 to 1.77 +/- 0.73 and 1.79 +/- 0.73 mg/dl 48 h and four days post-contrast (p = 0.02 and 0.023 vs. baseline, respectively). In the hydration group, serum creatinine increased from 1.75 +/- 0.41 to 1.81 +/- 0.6 48 h and 1.80 +/- 0.50 mg/dl four days post-contrast (p = 0.99 and 0.23, respectively). NAC infusion was ceased after the bolus in three patients (7%) due to flushing, itching, or a transient rash. CONCLUSIONS Administration of IV NAC should be considered in all patients at risk of RCIN before contrast exposure when time constraints preclude adequate oral prophylaxis, provided the patient is able to tolerate this degree of volume loading. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41: 2114-8) (C) 2003 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

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