Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the effects of diclofenac sodium and etodolac on renal hemodynamics with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: a pilot study

  • Clinical Trial
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) is a novel approach used for measuring organ perfusion changes. Studies using CEUS to assess the effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on renal blood flow (RBF) have not yet been conducted. We aimed to evaluate the effects of NSAIDs on the renal hemodynamics of healthy subjects with CEUS.

Methods

We performed CEUS using the bolus injection method in a total of 10 healthy subjects. Measurements were completed over two study days in a randomized, crossover manner. On each study day, CEUS was performed twice, before and after the administration of NSAIDs. Subjects received an injection of contrast medium and images were recorded. A region-of-interest (ROI) was selected within the renal cortex, signal intensity in the ROI of the kidney was measured and a time-intensity curve (TIC) was automatically generated with attached software.

Results

The mean (±SD) peak intensity decreased significantly after an administration of diclofenac sodium (from 26.0 × 10−4 ± 17.4 × 10−4 AU to 19.2 × 10−4 ± 12.0 × 10−4 AU; P = 0.022), but not significantly with etodolac (from 26.5 × 10−4 ± 9.7 × 10−4 AU to 25.9 × 10−4 ± 20.8 × 10−4 AU; P = 0.474). The mean (±SD) percent reduction in intensity following diclofenac sodium administration was significantly reduced compared with etodolac administration (22.2 ± 20.5 % vs. 3.4 ± 8.9 %, P = 0.037).

Conclusions

These finding suggests that diclofenac sodium (P = 0.022), but not etodolac (P = 0.474), affects renal hemodynamics even in healthy subjects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kalantarinia K, Belcik JT, Patrie JT, Wei K (2009) Real-time measurement of renal blood flow in healthy subjects using contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 297:F1129–F1134

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Quaia E (2011) Assessment of tissue perfusion by contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Eur Radiol 21:604–615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cosgrove D, Lassau N (2010) Imaging of perfusion using ultrasound. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:S65–S85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bentley MD, Lerman LO, Hoffman EA, Fiksen-Olsen MJ, Ritman EL, Romero JC (1994) Measurement of renal perfusion and blood flow with fast computed tomography. Circ Res 74:945–951

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ritt M, Janka R, Schneider MP, Martirosian P, Hornegger J, Bautz W, Uder M, Schmieder RE (2010) Measurement of kidney perfusion by magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of MRI with arterial spin labeling to para-aminohippuric acid plasma clearance in male subjects with metabolic syndrome. Nephrol Dial Transplant 25:1126–1133

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kudomi N, Koivuviita N, Liukko KE, Oikonen VJ, Tolvanen T, Iida H, Tertti R, Metsärinne K, Iozzo P, Nuutila P (2009) Parametric renal blood flow imaging using [15O]H2O and PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36:683–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaneko T, Teshigawara O, Sugimoto H, Hirota M, Inoue S, Takeda S, Nakao A (2005) Signal intensity of the liver parenchyma in microbubble contrast agent in the late liver phase reflects advanced fibrosis of the liver. Liver Int 25:288–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tousek P, Penicka M, Tintera J, Linkova H, Gregor P (2008) Identification of hibernating myocardium with myocardial contrast echocardiography: comparison with late gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance. Int J Cardiol 128:117–120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hosotani Y, Takahashi N, Kiyomoto H, Ohmori K, Hitomi H, Fujioka H, Aki Y, Fukunaga M, Yuasa S, Mizushige K, Kohno M (2002) A new method for evaluation of split renal cortical blood flow with contrast echography. Hypertens Res 25:77–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kishimoto N, Mori Y, Nishiue T, Nose A, Kijima Y, Tokoro T, Yamahara H, Okigaki M, Kosaki A, Iwasaka T (2004) Ultrasound evaluation of valsartan therapy for renal cortical perfusion. Hypertens Res 27:345–349

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tsuruoka K, Yasuda T, Koitabashi K, Yazawa M, Shimazaki M, Sakurada T, Shirai S, Shibagaki Y, Kimura K, Tsujimoto F (2010) Evaluation of renal microcirculation by contrast-enhanced ultrasound with sonazoidTM as a contrast agent: comparison between normal subjects and patients with chronic kidney disease. Int Heart J 51:176–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schneider AG, Hofmann L, Wuerzner G, Glatz N, Maillard M, Meuwly JY, Eggimann P, Burnier M, Vogt B (2012) Renal perfusion evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Nephrol Dial Transplant 27:674–681

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Weir MR (2002) Renal effects of nonselective NSAIDs and coxibs. Cleve Clin J Med 69(Suppl 1):SI53–SI58

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Toto RD, Anderson SA, Brown-Cartwright D, Kokko JP, Brater DC (1986) Effects of acute and chronic dosing of NSAIDs in patients with renal insufficiency. Kidney Int 30:760–768

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nielsen CB, Sørensen SS, Pedersen EB (1994) Identical effects of indomethacin on renal function in healthy uninephrectomized subjects and in healthy control subjects. Clin Sci 86:715–721

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Farker K, Merkel U, Schweer H, Haerting J, Madani SF, Eggers R, Müller UA, Seyberth HW, Hoffmann A (2002) Effects of short-term treatment with diclofenac-colestyramine on renal function and urinary prostanoid excretion in patients with type-2 diabetes. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 58:85–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fredman B, Zohar E, Golan E, Tillinger M, Bernheim J, Jedeikin R (1999) Diclofenac does not decrease renal blood flow or glomerular filtration in elderly patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. Anesth Analg 88:149–154

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Svendsen KB, Bech JN, Sørensen TB, Pedersen EB (2000) A comparison of the effects of etodolac and ibuprofen on renal haemodynamics, tubular function, renin, vasopressin and urinary excretion of albumin and α-glutathione-S-transferase in healthy subjects: a placebo-controlled cross-over study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 56:383–388

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Brater DC, Anderson SA, Brown-Cartwright D, Toto RD, Chen A, Jacob GB (1985) Effect of etodolac in patients with moderate renal impairment compared with normal subjects. Clin Phamacol Ther 38:674–679

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Manvelian G, Daniels S, Gibofsky A (2012) The pharmacokinetic parameters of a single dose of a novel nano-formulated, lower-dose oral diclofenac. Postgrad Med 124:117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Brater DC, Lasseter KC (1989) Profile of etodolac: pharmacokinetic evaluation in special populations. Clin Rheumatol 8(Suppl 1):25–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Whelton A (1999) Nephrotoxicity of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: physiologic foundations and clinical implications. Am J Med 106:13S–24S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Harris RC, Breyer MD (2006) Update on cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 1:236–245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Harris RC (2006) COX-2 and the kidney. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 47(Suppl 1):S37–S42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Endoscopy and Ultrasound, Department of Clinical Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kawasaki Medical School, 577 Matsushima, Kurashiki, Okayama, 701-0192, Japan

    Hiroshi Imamura, Jiro Hata, Ai Iida & Noriaki Manabe

  2. Department of Gastroenterology, Kawasaki Medical School, Okayama, Japan

    Ken Haruma

Authors
  1. Hiroshi Imamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiro Hata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ai Iida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Noriaki Manabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ken Haruma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroshi Imamura.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Imamura, H., Hata, J., Iida, A. et al. Evaluating the effects of diclofenac sodium and etodolac on renal hemodynamics with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: a pilot study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 69, 161–165 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-012-1336-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-012-1336-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation