1985British Journal of RadiologyRequires access

Comparative study of two iodinated contrast media containing 20% iodine in lower-limb phlebography: ioxaglate versus a conventional product

J P Trigaux, R. de Fays, F. de Fays

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

Forty-eight patients were examined by bilateral ascending phlebography in a crossover, prospective, randomised, double-blind study. A low-osmolar agent (Hexabrix) (ioxaglate, 200 mg iodine/ml) and a dilute conventional contrast medium (Angiografin) (meglumine diatrizoate) with the same iodine concentration were used for each limb alternately. The adverse reactions and the quality of diagnostic data were recorded: the Student paired-t-test showed statistically that ioxaglate containing 200 mg iodine per ml was better tolerated and that diagnostic information was equally good for the deep and ilio-caval systems, but seemed better with diatrizoate for superficial veins with extensive varicosity. The authors conclude that ioxaglate 200 is advantageous overall in lower-limb phlebography from the standpoints of tolerance, diagnostic data and cost.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Forty-eight patients were examined by bilateral ascending phlebography in a crossover, prospective, randomised, double-blind study. A low-osmolar agent (Hexabrix) (ioxaglate, 200 mg iodine/ml) and a dilute conventional contrast medium (Angiografin) (meglumine diatrizoate) with the same iodine concentration were used for each limb alternately. The adverse reactions and the quality of diagnostic data were recorded: the Student paired-t-test showed statistically that ioxaglate containing 200 mg iodine per ml was better tolerated and that diagnostic information was equally good for the deep and ilio-caval systems, but seemed better with diatrizoate for superficial veins with extensive varicosity. The authors conclude that ioxaglate 200 is advantageous overall in lower-limb phlebography from the standpoints of tolerance, diagnostic data and cost.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Forty-eight patients were examined by bilateral ascending phlebography in a crossover, prospective, randomised, double-blind study. A low-osmolar agent (Hexabrix) (ioxaglate, 200 mg iodine/ml) and a dilute conventional contrast medium (Angiografin) (meglumine diatrizoate) with the same iodine concentration were used for each limb alternately. The adverse reactions and the quality of diagnostic data were recorded: the Student paired-t-test showed statistically that ioxaglate containing 200 mg iodine per ml was better tolerated and that diagnostic information was equally good for the deep and ilio-caval systems, but seemed better with diatrizoate for superficial veins with extensive varicosity. The authors conclude that ioxaglate 200 is advantageous overall in lower-limb phlebography from the standpoints of tolerance, diagnostic data and cost.

Key concepts: Diatrizoate Meglumine, Iodine, Iodinated contrast media, Diatrizoate, Medicine, Nuclear medicine, Iodinated contrast, Contrast medium

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative study of two iodinated contrast media containing 20% iodine in lower-limb phlebography: ioxaglate versus a conventional product — Research Paper | ScholarLens