BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
First published online December 8, 2008
British Journal of Radiology (2009) 82, 204-211
© 2009 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/93627766
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ROMANO, L
Right arrow Articles by CATALANO, C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by ROMANO, L
Right arrow Articles by CATALANO, C
British Journal of Radiology 82 (2009),204-211 ©2009 The British Institute of Radiology

Enhancement and safety of iomeprol-400 and iodixanol-320 in patients undergoing abdominal multidetector CT

L ROMANO, MD 1 L GRAZIOLI, MD 2 L BONOMO, MD 3 J-R XU, MD 4 K-M CHEN, MD 5 R DORE, MD 6 A VANZULLI, MD 7 and C CATALANO, MD 8

1 Diagnostic Imaging Department, Cardarelli Hospital, Naples, Italy, 2 Radiology Service, University of Brescia, Hospital "Spedali Civile", Brescia, Italy, 3 Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Policlinico Gemelli, Rome, Italy, 4 Department of Radiology, Ren Ji Hospital, Shanghai, China, 5 Department of Radiology, Rui Jin Hospital, Shanghai, China, 6 Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy, 7 Department of Radiology, Niguarda Ca Granda Hospital, Milan, Italy and 8 Department of Radiological Science, University of Rome, Hospital "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy

Correspondence: Luigia Romano, Diagnostic Imaging Department, Cardarelli Hospital,Via A. Manzoni n. 213, Naples 80123, Italy. E-mail: luigia.romano{at}fastwebnet.it

The purpose of this study was to compare iomeprol-400 and iodixanol-320 for contrast enhancement and safety in patients undergoing liver multidetector CT (MDCT). 183 patients undergoing MDCT received equi-iodine (40 gI) iomeprol-400 (n = 91) or iodixanol-320 (n = 92) IV at 4 ml s–1. Two off-site, independent, blinded readers determined the contrast density (in Hounsfield units (HUs)) in the abdominal aorta, inferior vena cava, portal vein and liver parenchyma during the arterial and portal phases. The mean contrast densities achieved were compared and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) estimated. Heart rate was measured at baseline and at post-dose peak, and a full safety assessment was performed. Study group demographics were comparable. Iomeprol-400 produced significantly greater enhancement of the aorta during the arterial phase (Reader 1: 337.3 HU vs 294.9 HU, 95% CI of difference (19.4, 65.5), p = 0.0004; Reader 2: 325.7 HU vs 295.3 HU, 95% CI of difference (6.6, 54.3), p = 0.01) and greater enhancement of the liver parenchyma during the portal venous phase (Reader 1: 115.1 H vs 108.6 HU, 95% CI of difference (0.27, 12.7), p = 0.04; Reader 2: 115.2 H vs 109.3 HU, 95% CI of difference (–0.1, 11.8), p = 0.05). Similar enhancement of the inferior vena cava and portal vein was noted. Comparably negligible increases in the mean heart rate were observed. Adverse events occurred in 1/91 (1.1%) subjects after iomeprol-400 and 4/92 (4.3%) subjects after iodixanol-320. In conclusion, iomeprol-400 produces greater arterial and portal phase enhancement and has a similarly negligible impact on heart rate and safety.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Romano
Radiology in Italy: What Is Happening?
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2009; 193(4): W273 - W277.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2009 by the British Institute of Radiology.