IOMEPROL VERSUS IOPROMIDE FOR INTRAVENOUS UROGRAPHY

Citation
P. Degeeter et H. Melchior, IOMEPROL VERSUS IOPROMIDE FOR INTRAVENOUS UROGRAPHY, British journal of radiology, 67(802), 1994, pp. 958-963
Citations number
20
Categorie Soggetti
Radiology,Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
Journal title
British journal of radiology
ISSN journal
00071285 → ACNP
Volume
67
Issue
802
Year of publication
1994
Pages
958 - 963
Database
ISI
SICI code
Abstract
Iomeprol (B16880) is a new non-ionic tri-iodinated radiographic contra st medium. It was the aim of this double blind randomized phase III cl inical trial to compare the local and systemic tolerance of iomeprol-3 00 (300 mg I ml(-1)) with the commercially available iopromide-300 (30 0 mg I ml(-1)) in a group of 198 patients needing intravenous urograph y. The contrast medium was injected rapidly into an antecubital vein w ithin 2-3 min in most cases, using a standard dosage of 1 ml kg(-1) bo dy weight. The proportion of patients with an allergic diathesis was 2 5% in the iomeprol group and 17.3% in the iopromide group. There were no life-threatening adverse reactions. Eight patients (8%) receiving i omeprol and 6 (6.1%) receiving iopromide had a sensation of heat relat ed to the injection of contrast medium. Only one patient (1%) in the i omeprol group and two patients (2%) in the iopromide group noted pain on injection. Although the incidence of all other side-effects was rel atively high (7% after iomeprol and 11.2% after iopromide) these react ions were generally harmless. The most common symptom was nausea and/o r vomiting, which occurred with the same incidence (5%) in both groups . Only one patient in each group developed urticaria or erythema. Vita l parameters remained essentially unchanged in all patients. The resul ts suggest that iomeprol is a safe contrast medium, with a tendency to produce fewer side effects than iopromide, which is known to be parti cularly well tolerated.