1983Journal of neurosurgeryRequires access

A double-blind clinical trial of iopamidol versus metrizamide for lumbosacral myelography

Burton P. Drayer, CHARLES J. VASSALLO, Abraham Sudilovsky, Jay Luther, Robert H. Wilkins, Susan Allen, Milton Bates

Open publisher page 31 citations

Abstract

A double-blind study was performed to compare metrizamide with the new iodinated water-soluble nonionic contrast medium, iopamidol, for conventional and computerized tomography lumbosacral myelography. Both contrast agents were used in 30 patients, and were equivalent in terms of image quality and clinical accuracy. Headaches and nausea were less severe using iopamidol. The most striking difference was found in adverse neurobehavioral reactions and associated electroencephalographic abnormalities, which were noted in 17% of the metrizamide group but were not seen with the use of iopamidol. Iopamidol appears to be superior to metrizamide for intrathecal applications. An explanation of the differential neurotoxicity is provided.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A double-blind study was performed to compare metrizamide with the new iodinated water-soluble nonionic contrast medium, iopamidol, for conventional and computerized tomography lumbosacral myelography. Both contrast agents were used in 30 patients, and were equivalent in terms of image quality and clinical accuracy. Headaches and nausea were less severe using iopamidol. The most striking difference was found in adverse neurobehavioral reactions and associated electroencephalographic abnormalities, which were noted in 17% of the metrizamide group but were not seen with the use of iopamidol. Iopamidol appears to be superior to metrizamide for intrathecal applications. An explanation of the differential neurotoxicity is provided.

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

A double-blind study was performed to compare metrizamide with the new iodinated water-soluble nonionic contrast medium, iopamidol, for conventional and computerized tomography lumbosacral myelography. Both contrast agents were used in 30 patients, and were equivalent in terms of image quality and clinical accuracy. Headaches and nausea were less severe using iopamidol. The most striking difference was found in adverse neurobehavioral reactions and associated electroencephalographic abnormalities, which were noted in 17% of the metrizamide group but were not seen with the use of iopamidol. Iopamidol appears to be superior to metrizamide for intrathecal applications. An explanation of the differential neurotoxicity is provided.

Key concepts: Medicine, Metrizamide, Iopamidol, Myelography, Lumbosacral joint, Anesthesia, Surgery, Radiology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A double-blind clinical trial of iopamidol versus metrizamide for lumbosacral myelography — Research Paper | ScholarLens