Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of loxaglate and lobitridol in renal angioplasty

  • Clinical Investigations
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: To compare ioxaglate and iobitridol for percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) as regards thromboembolic complications, the quality of diagnosis, and renal and general safety.

Methods: One hundred and eighty-nine patients were prospectively studied, 98 of whom received ioxaglate, and 91, iobitridol. Twenty-two were secondarily excluded from the evaluation of thromboembolic complications as they did not undergo PTRA.

Results: Two hundred and two PTRAs were performed. The total volumes of contrast medium administered and the procedure durations were the same for each patient. In the ioxaglate group, four dissections (3 stents), one occlusive dissection, and two spasms occurred; in the iobitridol group, there were three dissections (all stented), one occlusive dissection (stented), and two spasms. The final angiograms showed four renal infarctions with ioxaglate (2 of which were in patients who were not anticoagulated), two with iobitridol. No significant difference was seen in the incidence of thromboembolic complications when the PTRA was performed after anticoagulation (n=150; 3.9% vs 4%, p=0.78); in the whole population, thromboembolic complications were more frequent in the ioxaglate group but the difference was not significant (5.7% vs 3.7%, p=0.74). The quality of the diagnosis and the general and renal safety were the same in the two groups.

Conclusion: Regarding the clotting phenomenon, we recorded as many thromboembolic complications with ioxaglate as with iobitridol.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bonafe A, Holley P, Blanchin M, Corot C (1996) Catheters and guide-wires electronic microscopic analysis after cerebral angiography: Hexabrix versus Omnipaque. Neuroradiology 38 [Suppl 2]:70 (n. 147)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Casalini E (1992) Role of low-osmolality contrast media in thromboembolic complications: Scanning electron microscopy studv. Radiology 183:741–744

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Corot C, Cornillac A, Belleville J, Eloy R (1991) Scanning electron microscopy analysis of catheters during routine angiographic procedures: Role of the contrast agent. Invest Radiol 26 [Suppl I]:96–100

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dawson P (1988) Nonionic contrast agents and coagulation. Invest Radiol 23 [Suppl 2]:310–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Robertson HJ (1987) Blood clot formation in angiographic syringes containing nonionic contrast media. Radiology 162:621–622

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Aguejouf O, Doutremepuich F, Azougagh Oualane F, Doutremepuich C (1995) Thrombogenicity of ionic and nonionic contrast media tested in a laser induced rat thrombosis model. Thrombosis Res 77:259–269

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Grines CL, Mickelson J, Diaz C, DeMaria A (1991) Acute thrombosis in a canine model of arterial injury: Effect of ionic versus nonionic contrast media. J Invas Cardiol 3 [Suppl B]: 18–23

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bashore TM, Mark DB, Davidson C, Kisslo K, Skelton T, Pryor D (1987) Iopamidol use in the cardiac catheterization laboratory: Initial experience in 1750 patients. Diagn Imaging 9 [Suppl]: 19–22

    Google Scholar 

  9. Davidson CJ, Mark DB, Pieper KS, Kisslo KB, Hlatky MA, Gabriel DA, Bashore TM (1990) Thrombotic and cardiovascular complications related to nonionic contrast media during cardiac catheterization: Analysis of 8517 patients. Am J Cardiol 65:1481–1484

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Esplugas E, Cequier A, Jara F, Mauri J, Soler T, Sala J, Sabate M (1991) Risk of thrombosis during coronary angioplasty with low osmolality contrast media. Am J Cardiol 68:1020–1024

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fransson SG, Stenport G, Andersson M (1996) Immediate and late adverse reactions in coronary angiography: A comparison between iodixanol and ioxaglate. Acta Radiol 37:218–222

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Grines CL, Schreiber TL, Savas V, Jones DE, Zidar FJ, Gangadharam V, Brodsky M, Levin R, Sarian R, Puchrowicz-Ochocki S, Castellani MD, O’Neill WW (1996) A randomized trial of low osmolar ionic versus nonionic contrast media in patients with myocardial infarction or unstable angina undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 27:1381–1386

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Grollman JH, Liu CK, Astone RA, Lurie MD (1988) Thromboembolic complications in coronary angiography associated with the use of nonionic contrast medium. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn 14:159–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Klinke WP, Grace M, Miller R, Naqvi SZ, Roth D, Roy L (1989) A multicentered randomized trial of ionic (ioxaglate) and nonionic (iopamidol) low-osmolality contrast agents in cardiac angiography. Clin Cardiol 12:689–696

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lembo NJ, King SB 3d, Roubin GS, Black AJ, Douglas JS Jr (1991) Effects of nonionic versus ionic contrast media on complications of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 67: 1046–1050

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Royer T, Berrocal D, Morice MC, Glatt B, Rosenblatt E, Tonnelier M (1991) Acute occlusion during coronary angioplasty: The role of contrast media. In: Marro J, Bonan R (eds) Abrupt Closure During Coronary Angioplasty: A Satellite Symposium of the Third Complex Coronary Angioplasty Course, Toulouse, 27 April 1991. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 41–50

    Google Scholar 

  17. Piessens JH, Stammen F, Vrolix MC, Glazier JJ, Benit E, De Geest H, Willems JL (1993) Effects of an ionic versus a nonionic low osmolar contrast agent on the thrombotic complications of coronary angioplasty. Catheter Cardiovasc Diagn 28:99–105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lagrange CH, Revel D, Amiel M (1990) Produits de contraste en imagerie par rayons X. EMC Radiodiagn 6 (A 10): 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sato E, Saito I (1996) Risk of clot formation with ionic and nonionic contrast media in cerebral angiography. Acad Radiol 3:925–928

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Van Beek EJ, Levi M, Reekers JA, Hack CE, Buller HR, ten Cate JW (1994) Increased plasma levels of PAI-I after administration of nonionic contrast medium in patients undergoing pulmonary angiography. Radiology 193:821–823

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mahler F, Triller J, Weidmann P, Nachbur B (1986) Complications in percutaneous transluminal dilatation of renal arteries. Nephron 44 [Suppl 1]:60–63

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Casalini E, Spinazzi A, Barth P (1990) Effect of two low-osmolality contrast media on the aggregation of red blood cells: An in vivo comparison between ioxaglate and iohexol during standard intra-arte-rial digital subtraction angiography. In: Eloy R (ed) Thromboembolic Risks in Angiography: Role of Iodinated Contrast Media. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 33–36

    Google Scholar 

  23. Idee JM, Beaufils H, Bonnemain B (1994) Iodinated contrast media-induced nephropathy: Pathophysiology, clinical aspects and prevention. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 8:193–206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Madani A, Michils A, Duchateau J, Struyven J, Gevenois P (1997) Intolérance aux produits de contraste iodés. Feuillets Radiol 37:44–55

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, BP 69, F-63003, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Valérie Dieu, Jean-Marc Garcier & Louis Boyer

  2. Department of Radiology, Rangueil University Hospital, 1 Avenue J. Poulhes, F-31054, Toulouse, France

    Francis Joffre

  3. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, 2 Boulevard De Lattre de Tassigny, F-21034, Dijon, France

    Denis Krause

  4. Department of Radiology, La Timone University Hospital, 264 rue St. Pierre, F-13385, Marseille Cedex 5, France

    Jean -M. Bartoli

  5. Department of Radiology, E. Herriot University Hospital, Pavillon P, 5 place d’Arsonval, F-69437, Lyon Cedex 03, France

    Denis Lyonnet

  6. Department of Radiology, University Hospital, F-42055, St. Etienne Cedex 2, France

    Charles Veyret

Authors
  1. Valérie Dieu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francis Joffre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Denis Krause
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jean -M. Bartoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Denis Lyonnet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Charles Veyret
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jean-Marc Garcier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Louis Boyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dieu, V., Joffre, F., Krause, D. et al. A comparison of the efficacy and safety of loxaglate and lobitridol in renal angioplasty. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 23, 91–96 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002709910020

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002709910020

Key words

Search

Navigation