Journal Browser Advanced Search Help
Journal Browser Advanced search HELP
-
J Korean Radiol Soc. 1988 Apr;24(2):324-329. Korean. Original Article. https://doi.org/10.3348/jkrs.1988.24.2.324
Lee JT , Suh JH , Suh JS , Lee YH .
Abstract

Generally non-ionic, water-soluble contrast media has been known to be cosiderable better than the conventional ionic contrast agents, because of its phsiochemical properities which are more hydrophilic, lower inosmolality than the ionic agents of equivalent iodine concentration. It means that the non-ionic agent has lessside reaction and better general tolerance. Iopromide(Ultravist) is a newly developed non-ionic contast media thatis suitable for angiography. Some non-ionic contrast media such as Metrizamide and lopamidol were clinically introduced and proved tobe the most compromising agents for neuroradiographic study, but lopromide is not yetfreely available in the vascular study. In order to evaluate the clinical fitness and its side effects of lopromide for angiography various type of angiography were done in 136 patients using lopromide and ionic contrastmedia, Diatrizoate megluine for comparison. 85 patients received lopromide and 51 received Diatrizoate meglumine(DTM). Similar volumes of the contrast media was administered at similar rate to both groups. The results were as the follows: 1. In celiac angiography of 31 patients with lopromide (Ultravist 370) and 18 with DTM 60,there were observed 9.7% mild pain and 25.8% mild heat sensation in lopromide. In DTM 60 mild pain was approximately 3 times more frequently observed than lopromide, Heat sensation is mild and similar in frequency of both groups. There was no clinically significant side effects relate to the osmolality and its difference between two groups. 2. In peripheral angiography of 47 patients with lopromide 300 and 24 with DTM 60, there were observed 19.1% mild, 6.4 moderate in pain and 46.8% mild, 1% moderate heat sensation in lopromide. But in DTM there were 33.3% mild, 58.3% moderate and 8.3% severe pain, and also 70.8% mild and 16.7% moderated heat sensation in DTMwere observed. Iopromide is more advantageous and better contrast agents than the DTM for peripheral vascularstudy on the point of low side effect related to osmolality. 3. In renal angiography, there was no clinically significant side effects and its difference between two groups. 4. Among 85 patients with Iopromide and 51 with DTM, there were 8% general side effects in Iopromide and 17.6% in DRM. In Iopromide they were nausia(7.1%),chilling (1.2%), Sweat(1.2%) and Hypotension(1.2%). The frequency of general side reaction was not significantly different between two groups. 5. The quality of angiogram with Iopromide and DTM was "good" in almost cases and there were no clinically difference between two groups.

Copyright © 2019. Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors.