1-Moler Gadobutrol as a Contrast Agent for Digital Subtraction Amiography;Einmolares Gadobutrol als Kontrastmittel für die Digitale Subtraktionsangiographie

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 176, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 85-90

  Kalinowski, M ^a   Wagner, Hans Joachim ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL MARBURG   (Germany)

^b PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Contrast media induced nephropathy; Digital subtraction angiography; Gadobutrol

Indexed keywords

CREATININE; GADOBUTROL; GADODIAMIDE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOTERIDOL; IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ALLERGIC REACTION; ANGIOGRAPHY; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIGITAL SUBTRACTION ANGIOGRAPHY; DOSE RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; KIDNEY DISEASE; KIDNEY FAILURE; MALE; PERCUTANEOUS TRANSLUMINAL ANGIOPLASTY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIDE EFFECT; TREATMENT CONTRAINDICATION;

AGED; ANGIOGRAPHY, DIGITAL SUBTRACTION; ANGIOPLASTY, BALLOON; ARTERIAL OCCLUSIVE DISEASES; CONTRAST MEDIA; CREATININE; FEMALE; FEMORAL ARTERY; HUMANS; IOPAMIDOL; KIDNEY FAILURE, CHRONIC; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; POPLITEAL ARTERY; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 0942286987     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-814659     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Katayama H, Yamaguchi K, Kozuka T, et al. Adverse reactions to ionic and nonionic contrast media: A report from the Japanese Commitee on the safety of contrast media. Radiology 1990; 175: 621-628
2. Aspelin P, et al. Nephrotoxic effects in high-risk patients undergoing angiography. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 491-499
3. Singh H, Cardella JF, Cole PE, et al. Quality improvement guidelines for diagnostic arteriography. JVIR 2002; 13: 1-6
4. Marcos SK, Thomsen HS, Webb JAW. Contrast-media-induced nephrotoxicity: a consensus report. Eur Radiol 1999; 9: 1602-1613
5. Rudnick MR, Goldfarb S, Wexler L, et al. Nephrotoxicity of ionic and non-ionic contrastmedia in 1196 patients: a randomised trial. The iohexol cooperative study. Kidney International 1995; 47: 254-61
6. Porter GA. Radiocontrast-induced nephropathy. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1994; 9: 146-156
7. Solomon R, Werner C, Mann D, D'Elia J, Silva P. Effects of saline, mannitol, and furosemide on acute decreases in renal function induced by radiocontrast agents. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1416-1420
8. Tepel M, van der Giet M, Schwarzfeld C, Laufer U, Liermann D, Zidek W. Prevention of Radiographic-contrast-agent-induced reductions in renal function by acetylcysteine. N Engl J med 2000; 343: 180-184
9. Chu VL, Cheng JW. Fenoldapam in the prevention of contrast media-induced acute renal failure. Ann Pharmacother 2001; 35: 1278-1281
10. Sutton AG, Finn P, Grech ED, et al. Early and late reactions after the use of iopamidol 340, ioxaglate 320, and iodixanol 320 in cardiac catherization. Am Heart J 2001; 141: 677-680
11. Strunk H, Schild H, Mortasawi MA. Arteriell-interventionelle Eingriffe unter Benutzung von Kohlendioxid (CO2) als Kontrastmittel. Fortschr Röntgenstr 1992; 157: 599-600
12. Schild HH, Weber W, Boeck E, Mildenberger P, Strunk H, Düber Ch, Grebe P, Schadmand-Fischer S, Thelen M. Gadolinium-DTPA (Magnevist) als Kontrastmittel für die arterielle DSA. Fortschr Röntgenstr 1994; 160: 218-221
13. Kaufman JA, Geller SC, Waltman AC. Renal insufficiency: gadopentetate dimeglumine as a radiographic contrast agent during peripheral vascular interventional procedures. Radiology 1996; 198: 579-581
14. Hammer FD, Goffette PP, Malaise J, Mathurin P. Gadolinium dimeglumine: an alternative contrast agent for digital subtraction angiography. Eur Radiology 1999; 9: 128-136
15. Wagner HJ, Kalinowski M, Klose KJ, Alfke H. The use of gadolinium chelates for X-ray digital subtraction angiography. Investigative Radiology 2001; 36: 257-265
16. Vogler H, Platzek J, Schuhmann-Giampieri G, Frenzel T, Weinmann H-J, Raduechel B, Press W-R. Preclinical evaluation of gadobutrol: a new extracellular contrast agent for magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiology 1995; 21: 1-10
17. Staks T, Schumann-Giampieri G, Frenzel T, Weinmann H-J, Lange L, Platzek J. Pharmacokinetics, dose-proportionality, and tolerability of gadobutrol after single intravenous injection in healthy volunteers. Invest Radiol 1994; 29: 709-715
18. Kalden P, Kreitner KF, Oberholzer K, et al. Kontrastmittelgestützte 3D-MR-Angiographie der Becken- und Beinarterien mit automatischer Tischverschiebung bei 1,0 Tesla. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2000; 172: 978-984
19. Lenhart M, Herold T, Volk M, et al. Kontrastmittelgestützte MR-Angiographie der Becken- und Beinarterien mit Schrittverschiebetechnik unter Einsatz eines dezidierten Spulensystems. Erste klinische Erfahrungen. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2000; 172: 992-999
20. Schäfer FKW, Schäfer PJ, Jahnke T, Walluschek K, Priebe M, Hentsch A, Heller J, Brossmann J. Erste klinische Erfahrungen zur Wertigkeit der kontrastverstärkten Magnetresonanz-Angiographie der Becken-Bein-Strombahn mit dem 1,0 molaren Gadobutrol-Vergleich zur i.a. DSA. Fortschr. Röntgenstr. 2003; 175: 556-564
21. 2 angiography in patients with renal insufficiency. JVIR 2000; 11: 35-43
22. 2 digital subtraction angiography: potential complications and their prevention. JVIR 1997; 8: 383-391
23. Rolland Y, Duvauferrier R, Lucas A, et al. Lower limb angiography: A prospective study comparing carbon dioxide with iodinated contrast material in 30 patients. AJR 1998; 171: 333-337
24. Cardinal HN, Holdsworth DW, Drangova M, Hobbs BB, Fenster A. Experimental and theoretical x-ray imaging performance comparison of iodine and lanthanide contrast agents. Med Phys 1993; 20 (1): 15-31
25. Kalinowski M, Kress O, Wels T, Alfke H, Klose KJ, Wagner HJ. X-ray digital subtraction angiography with 1 mol/l gadobutrol: results from a comparative porcine study with iodinated contrast agents. Invest Radiol 2002; 37: 254-262
26. Prince MR, Arnoldus C, Frisoli JK. Nephrotoxicity of high-dose gadolinium compared with iodinated contrast. JMRI 1996; 6: 162-166
27. Goldstein H, Kashanian F, Blumetti R, et al. Safety assessment of gadopentetate dimeglumine in US clinical trials. Radiology 1990; 174: 7-34
28. Tombach P, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Pharmacokinetics of 1M gadobutrol in patients with chronic renal failure. Invest Radiol 2000; 35: 35-40
29. Haustein J, Niendorf HP, Krestin G, et al. Renal tolerance of gadolinium-DTPA/dimeglumine in patients with chronic renal failure. Invest Radiol 1992; 27: 153-156
30. Joffe P, Thomsen HS, Heusel M. Pharmacokinetics of gadodiamide injection in patients with severe renal insufficiency and patients undergoing hemodialysis of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Acad Radiol 1998; 5: 491-502
31. Niendorf HP, Haustein J, Louton T, Beck W, Laniado M. Safety and tolerance after intravenous administration of 0.3 mmol/kg Gd-DTPA: results from a randomized controlled clinical trial. Invest Radiol 1991; 26: 221-223
32. Tombach B, Bremer C, Kisters K, et al. Renal tolerance of a neutral gadolinium chelate (gadobutrol) in patients with chronic renal failure: results of a randomized study. Radiology 2001; 218: 651-657
33. Nyman U, Emstahl B, Leander P, et al. Are gadolinium-based contrast media really safer than iodinated contrast media for digital subtraction angiography in patients with azotemia? Radiology 2002; 223: 311-318
34. Spinosa DJ, Kaufman JA, Hartwell GD. Gadolinium chelates in angiography and interventional radiology: a useful alternative to iodinated contrast media for angiography. Radiology 2002; 223: 319-325
35. Kalinowski M, Kress O, Wels T, Alfke H, Klose KJ, Wagner HJ. 1-Molar Gadobutrol as a Contrast Agent for Computed Tomography: Results From a Comparative Porcine Study. Invest Radiol 2003; 38 (4): 193-199