A PROSPECTIVE CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING METRIZAMIDE AND IOHEXOL FOR EQUINE MYELOGRAPHY
William R. Widmer, William E. Blevins, Samuel Jakovljevic, Michel Lévy, Robert Teclaw, Connie M. Han, Cheryl D. Hurd
Abstract
William R. Widmer, William E. Blevins, Samuel Jakovljevic, Michel Lévy, Robert Teclaw, Connie M. Han, Cheryl D. Hurd
Abstract
A prospective clinical trial comparing adverse postmyelographic effects and myelographic quality of metrizamide and iohexol was conducted. Using a predetermined, randomized assignment, 24 horses exhibiting neurologic signs were administered either metrizamide (180 mgl/ml) or iohexol (180 mgl/ml) via cerebellomedullary puncture. Each horse was evaluated postmyelographically for adverse effects. Myelographic quality was assessed by a numerical scoring method. Adverse effects were observed more frequently with metrizamide (21) compared with iohexol (6) myelography (p < 0.05). Seizures, intensification of preexisting neurologic signs and prolonged anesthetic recovery were the most common complications after myelography. There was no difference in myelographic quality (p > 0.05). We conclude that iohexol is safer than metrizamide for equine myelography and that quality myelograms can be obtained with either contrast medium.
OpenAlex reports 23 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
A prospective clinical trial comparing adverse postmyelographic effects and myelographic quality of metrizamide and iohexol was conducted. Using a predetermined, randomized assignment, 24 horses exhibiting neurologic signs were administered either metrizamide (180 mgl/ml) or iohexol (180 mgl/ml) via cerebellomedullary puncture. Each horse was evaluated postmyelographically for adverse effects. Myelographic quality was assessed by a numerical scoring method. Adverse effects were observed more frequently with metrizamide (21) compared with iohexol (6) myelography (p < 0.05). Seizures, intensification of preexisting neurologic signs and prolonged anesthetic recovery were the most common complications after myelography. There was no difference in myelographic quality (p > 0.05). We conclude that iohexol is safer than metrizamide for equine myelography and that quality myelograms can be obtained with either contrast medium.
Key concepts: Metrizamide, Medicine, Iohexol, Myelography, Adverse effect, Anesthesia, Contrast medium, Radiology