1995British Journal of RadiologyRequires access

A comparison of iodixanol with iopamidol in aorto-femoral angiography

Peter Verow, Jon Ø. Nossen, A. Sheppick, P. Kjærsgaard

Open publisher page 31 citations

Abstract

This double-blind, randomized, parallel group clinical investigation in 140 consecutive patients undergoing aorto-femoral arteriography was carried out to compare iodixanol (Visipaque) 270 mgI ml-1 with iopamidol (Iopamiro) 300 mgI ml-1. The aims of the study were to compare adverse events and discomfort, clinical chemistry parameters in blood, haemodynamics and diagnostic information of the angiograms in the two groups. The main parameter for statistical analysis was the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for overall discomfort experienced by the patients during the examination. 134 patients, 69 and 65 receiving iodixanol and iopamidol, respectively, were examined according to the protocol and included in the evaluation. The two groups of patients were judged to be comparative. Statistically significant milder discomfort was felt with iodixanol than with iopamidol (p = 0.0001); mean VAS values 16 mm and 51 mm, respectively. Pain was reported far less frequently after iodixanol than after iopamidol (7.4% versus 50.8%) whereas sensation of warmth was less intense after iodixanol than after iopamidol. Four patients in the iodixanol group and two in the iopamidol group reported transient, non-serious adverse events. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.68). Systolic blood pressure was affected to a slightly greater degree after injection of iopamidol than after injection of iodixanol. Measurements of diastolic blood pressure, as well as clinical chemistry parameters in blood, revealed no changes of clinical importance, and all arteriograms performed were of diagnostic value. The conclusion is that iodixanol 270 mgI ml-1 is as efficacious as iopamidol 300 mgI ml-1, but produces less discomfort during arteriography. As such, iodixanol is a good alternative to iopamidol in aorto-femoral angiography.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This double-blind, randomized, parallel group clinical investigation in 140 consecutive patients undergoing aorto-femoral arteriography was carried out to compare iodixanol (Visipaque) 270 mgI ml-1 with iopamidol (Iopamiro) 300 mgI ml-1. The aims of the study were to compare adverse events and discomfort, clinical chemistry parameters in blood, haemodynamics and diagnostic information of the angiograms in the two groups. The main parameter for statistical analysis was the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for overall discomfort experienced by the patients during the examination. 134 patients, 69 and 65 receiving iodixanol and iopamidol, respectively, were examined according to the protocol and included in the evaluation. The two groups of patients were judged to be comparative. Statistically significant milder discomfort was felt with iodixanol than with iopamidol (p = 0.0001); mean VAS values 16 mm and 51 mm, respectively. Pain was reported far less frequently after iodixanol than after iopamidol (7.4% versus 50.8%) whereas sensation of warmth was less intense after iodixanol than after iopamidol. Four patients in the iodixanol group and two in the iopamidol group reported transient, non-serious adverse events. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.68). Systolic blood pressure was affected to a slightly greater degree after injection of iopamidol than after injection of iodixanol. Measurements of diastolic blood pressure, as well as clinical chemistry parameters in blood, revealed no changes of clinical importance, and all arteriograms performed were of diagnostic value. The conclusion is that iodixanol 270 mgI ml-1 is as efficacious as iopamidol 300 mgI ml-1, but produces less discomfort during arteriography. As such, iodixanol is a good alternative to iopamidol in aorto-femoral angiography.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 31 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

This double-blind, randomized, parallel group clinical investigation in 140 consecutive patients undergoing aorto-femoral arteriography was carried out to compare iodixanol (Visipaque) 270 mgI ml-1 with iopamidol (Iopamiro) 300 mgI ml-1. The aims of the study were to compare adverse events and discomfort, clinical chemistry parameters in blood, haemodynamics and diagnostic information of the angiograms in the two groups. The main parameter for statistical analysis was the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for overall discomfort experienced by the patients during the examination. 134 patients, 69 and 65 receiving iodixanol and iopamidol, respectively, were examined according to the protocol and included in the evaluation. The two groups of patients were judged to be comparative. Statistically significant milder discomfort was felt with iodixanol than with iopamidol (p = 0.0001); mean VAS values 16 mm and 51 mm, respectively. Pain was reported far less frequently after iodixanol than after iopamidol (7.4% versus 50.8%) whereas sensation of warmth was less intense after iodixanol than after iopamidol. Four patients in the iodixanol group and two in the iopamidol group reported transient, non-serious adverse events. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.68). Systolic blood pressure was affected to a slightly greater degree after injection of iopamidol than after injection of iodixanol. Measurements of diastolic blood pressure, as well as clinical chemistry parameters in blood, revealed no changes of clinical importance, and all arteriograms performed were of diagnostic value. The conclusion is that iodixanol 270 mgI ml-1 is as efficacious as iopamidol 300 mgI ml-1, but produces less discomfort during arteriography. As such, iodixanol is a good alternative to iopamidol in aorto-femoral angiography.

Key concepts: Iopamidol, Iodixanol, Medicine, Blood pressure, Anesthesia, Hemodynamics, Contrast medium, Nuclear medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A comparison of iodixanol with iopamidol in aorto-femoral angiography — Research Paper | ScholarLens