Opportunities for new CT contrast agents to maximize the diagnostic potential of emerging spectral CT technologies.
Advanced drug delivery reviews
Risk of contrast-induced nephropathy for patients receiving intravenous vs. intra-arterial iodixanol administration
2016; 41 (1): 91-99
The introduction of spectral CT imaging in the form of fast clinical dual-energy CT enabled contrast material to be differentiated from other radiodense materials, improved lesion detection in contrast-enhanced scans, and changed the way that existing iodine and barium contrast materials are used in clinical practice. More profoundly, spectral CT can differentiate between individual contrast materials that have different reporter elements such that high-resolution CT imaging of multiple contrast agents can be obtained in a single pass of the CT scanner. These spectral CT capabilities would be even more impactful with the development of contrast materials designed to complement the existing clinical iodine- and barium-based agents. New biocompatible high-atomic number contrast materials with different biodistribution and X-ray attenuation properties than existing agents will expand the diagnostic power of spectral CT imaging without penalties in radiation dose or scan time.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.addr.2016.09.001
View details for PubMedID 27620496
View details for PubMedCentralID PMC5344792
To compare the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) for intravenous vs. intra-arterial administration of iodixanol, compared to non-administration.We retrospectively identified 650 patients who had intravenous iodixanol-enhanced CT, 695 with intra-arterial iodixanol cardiac catheterization, 651 with unenhanced CT, and those who also had baseline and follow-up serum creatinine within 5 days of the exam. From the medical records, we recorded the gender, age, baseline and follow-up serum creatinine/eGFR; underlying renal injury risk factors; indication for imaging; contrast material administration volume, concentration, and route of administration; and use of pre-imaging prophylactic measures for CIN. Univariate and multivariate models were used to determine predictors of CIN.Baseline eGFR was lower for patients undergoing unenhanced CT than intravenous or intra-arterial patients (68 vs. 74.6 and 72.2, respectively, p < 0.01) and not different between intravenous and intra-arterial patients (p = 0.735). Simple logistic regression did not show a difference in the rate of CIN in patients who received intravenous vs. intra-arterial iodixanol (28 of 650, 4%, vs. 28 of 695, 4%, respectively, p = 0.798), nor a higher rate of CIN than seen with unenhanced CT (45 of 651, 7%, p = 0.99 and p = 0.98 by one-sided t test). Multivariate regression modeling showed that only elevated baseline creatinine or decreased eGFR and low hematocrit/hemoglobin were associated with CIN incidence (odds ratio 1.28 and 2.5; p < 0.023 and <0.006, respectively).Elevation in serum creatinine due to intravenous and intra-arterial iodixanol administration is infrequent and is not more common than after unenhanced CT scans.
View details for DOI 10.1007/s00261-015-0611-9
View details for Web of Science ID 000374109400012
View details for PubMedID 26830615