Key result
Ioxaglate matches iopamidol in hemodynamic safety during cardiac angiography but causes more adverse reactions.
Why the study?
The electrocardiographic and hemodynamic effects of low osmolar ionic and nonionic contrast agents during cardiac angiography were not well compared in a randomized trial.
Does ioxaglate compared to iopamidol reduce electrocardiographic and hemodynamic changes in patients with angina pectoris undergoing cardiac angiography?
Population
150 patients with angina pectoris undergoing cardiac angiography
Comparison
Low osmolar ionic contrast agent (ioxaglate) vs low osmolar nonionic contrast agent (iopamidol)
Design
Multicentered double-blind randomized study
Follow-up
90 seconds following angiography
Authors
Loading...
Minor BP, LVEDP, HR, and QT differences between agents warrant no selection change; leaves open larger outcome trials.
RCT (n=150)
Double-blind
randomized
Yes
Does ioxaglate compared to iopamidol reduce electrocardiographic and hemodynamic changes in patients with angina pectoris undergoing cardiac angiography?
Both ioxaglate and iopamidol are safe for cardiac angiography with minimal hemodynamic and ECG changes, though ioxaglate is associated with a higher incidence of nausea and hives.
Klinke et al. (1989) conducted an RCT in Angina pectoris (n=150). Ioxaglate vs. Iopamidol was evaluated on Electrocardiographic and hemodynamic changes. Both ioxaglate and iopamidol are safe for cardiac angiography with minimal hemodynamic changes, though ioxaglate caused significantly more nausea (10 vs 1 patient) and hives (8 vs 1 patient).
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: