IJ Radiology
Iodinated X-ray contrast media are the most commonly used contrast agents in the world with an annual application of 40-50 million. New non-ionic con- trast agents are subdivided into low osmolar agents such as iopromide and iso-osmolar agents such as iodixanol. Regarding different biochemical characteristics, these agents are different in the allergic reactions and contrast enhancement and final lesion conspicuity.
This study was carried out to compare allergic adverse effects and contrast enhancement between iodixanol and iopromide.
One-hundred and twenty patients who were referred for abdominal CT scan to Besat Hospital were included in this study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups (A and B). Group A received 100 cc iodixanol (300 mgI/mL) and group B received 100 cc iopromide (300 mgI/ml) by power injector. CT examination was performed using Helical CT Scanner (Somatom, Siemens, Germany). Sixty seconds after injection, images were obtained and enhancement of port, liver and aorta were determined. Allergic adverse effects were recorded one hour and up to one week after injection.
Iodixanol produced a significantly greater enhancement of the hepatic, aorta and portal vein than iopromide (P < 0.01). Sixty seconds after injection, associated pain and heat sensation were less frequent in iodixanol in comparison with iopromide (P = 0.03). Immediate reactions such as nausea and vomiting were less frequent in iodixanol (P = 0.01). Late skin reactions such as rash was more frequent in iodixanol (P < 0.01).
Iodixanol is safe and is better tolerated in the early phase of injection with better contrast enhancement and lesion conspicuity. Mild late skin rash is its disadvantage.
© 2012, Author(s). This open-access article is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which allows for unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.
Li X, Luo S, Chen S, Wang D, Tan Y. Contrast-Enhanced Chest Computed Tomography (CT) Scan with Low Radiation and Total Iodine Dose for Lung Cancer Detection Using Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction. I J Radiol. 2022;19(4):e126572. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/iranjradiol-126572
Chang S, Lu C, Chiang I, Chung W, Hsieh T. A Saline Test Injection Mode Improving the Safety of Using a Power Injector for CT. I J Radiol. 2019;16(3):e85821. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/iranjradiol.85821
Hadjibabaie M. Iopaque 300 versus Omnipaque 300: A Randomized Double Blind Clinical Trial for Comparison of Efficacy and Adverse Effects in Peripheral Angiography. I J Radiol. 2007;4(2):e79100. doi:
Ehtiati A, Hejazi P, Bakhshandeh M, Jabbary Arfaee A, Rajab Bolookat E, et al. The Effect of Contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography (CT) Scans on the Calculated Dose of Radiotherapy in a Thorax Phantom. Int J Cancer Manag. 2021;14(1):e84158. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/ijcm.84158
Koca M, Sevinç Özakar R, Ozakar E, Sade R, Pirimoğlu B, et al. Preparation and Characterization of Nanosuspensions of Triiodoaniline Derivative New Contrast Agent, and Investigation into Its Cytotoxicity and Contrast Properties. Iran J Pharm Res. 2022;21(1):e123824. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/ijpr.123824
Ordering Reprints
Articles are published under the Creative Commons license stated on each article. No permission or royalty fee is required for uses permitted by that license. CCC handles optional bulk and customized reprint orders. Any quotation covers production and delivery services only, not copyright permission. > Request Reprints from CCC
