Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gomes, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Hartzman, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gomes, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Hartzman, S.

Radiology, Vol 170, 65-68, Copyright © 1989 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Acute renal dysfunction in high-risk patients after angiography: comparison of ionic and nonionic contrast media

AS Gomes, JF Lois, JD Baker, CT McGlade, DH Bunnell and S Hartzman
Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA Medical Center.

A group of 145 high-risk patients who underwent angiography after administration of the nonionic contrast agent iohexol were monitored for the development of acute renal dysfunction. The results in this group were compared with those in 202 high-risk historical control subjects who had undergone angiography after administration of ionic contrast material. All patients in both groups received similar pre- and postangiographic treatment. A greater number of patients in the ionic group had preexisting renal disease, were of advanced age, and had received large volumes of contrast material. Acute renal dysfunction occurred in 20 of the 202 (10%) patients in the ionic group, compared with eight of the 145 (5.5%) patients in the nonionic group; this difference is not statistically significant. Five patients in the ionic group, but none of the patients in the nonionic group, ultimately required dialysis; this difference is not statistically significant. The findings suggest that a randomized trial in high-risk patients should be undertaken before a clinical advantage of the nonionic contrast agent iohexol with regard to renal function can be assumed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. B. Tippins, W. E. Torres, B. R. Baumgartner, and D. A. Baumgarten
Are Screening Serum Creatinine Levels Necessary prior to Outpatient CT Examinations?
Radiology, August 1, 2000; 216(2): 481 - 484.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
R. Solomon, C. Werner, D. Mann, J. D'Elia, and P. Silva
Effects of Saline, Mannitol, and Furosemide on Acute Decreases in Renal Function Induced by Radiocontrast Agents
N. Engl. J. Med., November 24, 1994; 331(21): 1416 - 1420.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 PERSPECT VASC SURG ENDOVASC THERHome page
S. S. Ahn, J. D. Baker, and W. S. Moore
Carotid Endarterectomy Based on Duplex Scanning Without Routine Arteriography
Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, January 1, 1991; 4(1): 109 - 120.
[PDF]

Home page
 PERSPECT VASC SURG ENDOVASC THERHome page
H. C. Redman and G. L. Miller
Water-Soluble Radiographic Contrast Media: Ionic vs. Nonionic
Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, January 1, 1990; 3(2): 45 - 55.
[PDF]

Home page
 JWatch GeneralHome page
NONIONIC CONTRAST MEDIA: EASIER ON THE KIDNEYS?
Journal Watch (General), January 24, 1989; 1989(124): 5 - 5.
[Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1989 by the Radiological Society of North America.