Comparison of Iotrolan 320 and Iohexol 350 in cardiac angiography: A randomised double-blind clinical study

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 171-175

  Mezilis, N ^a   Salame, M Y ^a   Dyet, J F ^b   Arafa, S O ^a   Oakley, G D G ^a   Cumberland, D C ^a  

^a The Price Thomas Thoracic Unit   (United Kingdom)

^b Hull Roy Infirm Anlaby Rd H ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Adverse reactions; Contrast media; Coronary angiography; ECG; Haemodynamics

Indexed keywords

CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM; CONTRAST MEDIA; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; HEMODYNAMICS; IMAGE ANALYSIS;

CARDIAC ANGIOGRAPHY; IOHEXOL 350 CONTRAST MEDIUM; IOTROLAN 320 CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ANGIOGRAPHY;

IOHEXOL; IOTROLAN; IOTROLAN 320; MONOMERIC NONIONIC CONTRAST MEDIUM; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; ARRHYTHMOGENESIS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIASTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAPHY; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE CONTRACTION; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE ENDDIASTOLIC PRESSURE; HEART VENTRICULOGRAPHY; HEAT SENSATION; HUMAN; PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE;

ADULT; AGED; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; HUMANS; IOHEXOL; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; TRIIODOBENZOIC ACIDS;

EID: 0032168611     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0720-048X(97)00131-9     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Wisneski JA, Gertz EW, Dahlgren M, Muslin A Comparison of low osmolality ionic (ioxaglate) versus nonionic (iopamidol) contrast media in cardiac angiography. Am J Cardiol. 63:1989;489-495.
2. Piao ZE, Murdock DK, Hwang MH, Raymond RM, Scanlon PJ Contrast media induced ventricular fibrillation: a comparison of Hypaque-76. Hexabrix and Omnipaque. Invest Radiol. 23:1988;466-470.
3. Gertz EW, Wisnesky JA, Chiu D, Akin JR, Hu C Clinical superiority of a new non-ionic contrast agent (iopamidol) for cardiac angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 5:1985;250-258.
4. Bettmann MA, Bourdillon PD, Barry WH, Brush KA, Levin DC Contrast agents for cardiac angiography: effects of a nonionic agent vs. a standard ionic agent. Radiology. 153:1984;583-587.
5. Yoshikawa H Late adverse reactions to nonionic contrast media. Radiology. 183:1992;737-740.
6. Panto PN, Davies P Delayed reactions to urographic contrast media. B J Radiol. 59:1986;41-44.
7. Wisneski JA, Gertz EW, Neese RA, Morris DL Absence of myocardial biochemical toxicity with a nonionic contrast agent (iopamidol). Am Heart J. 110:1985;609-617.
8. Fattori R, Piva R, Schicchi F, Pancrazi A, Gabrielli G, Marzocchi A, Piovaccari G, Blandini A, Magnani B Iomeprol and Iopamidol in cardiac angiography: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group comparison. Eur J Radiol. 18(Suppl 1):1994;S61-S66.
9. Khoury GA, Hopper JC, Varghese Z, Farrington K, Dick R, Irving JD, Sweny P, Fernando ON, Moorhead JF Nephrotoxicity of ionic and nonionic contrast material in digital vascular imaging and selective renal arteriography. Br J Radiol. 56:1983;631-635.
10. Albrechtsson U, Hultberg B, Larusdottir H, Norgren L Nephrotoxicity of ionic and nonionic contrast media in aorto-femoral angiography. Acta Radiol (Diagn). 26:1985;615-618.
11. Wolf GL, Arenson RL, Cross AP A prospective trial of ionic vs. nonionic contrast agents in routine clinical practice: comparison of adverse effects. A J R. 152:1989;939-944.
12. McCullough M, Davies P, Richardson R A large trial of intravenous Conray 325 and Niopam 300 to assess immediate and delayed reactions. Br J Radiol. 62:1989;260-265.