FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 348:491-499 February 6, 2003 Number 6 Next

Abstract PDF PDA Full Text PowerPoint Slide Set Editorial by Sandler, C. M. Letters Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear PubMed Citation

ABSTRACT

Background The use of iodinated contrast medium can result in nephropathy. Whether iso-osmolar contrast medium is less nephrotoxic than low-osmolar contrast medium in high-risk patients is uncertain.

Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind, prospective, multicenter study comparing the nephrotoxic effects of an iso-osmolar, dimeric, nonionic contrast medium, iodixanol, with those of a low-osmolar, nonionic, monomeric contrast medium, iohexol. The study involved 129 patients with diabetes with serum creatinine concentrations of 1.5 to 3.5 mg per deciliter who underwent coronary or aortofemoral angiography. The primary end point was the peak increase from base line in the creatinine concentration during the three days after angiography. Other end points were an increase in the creatinine concentration of 0.5 mg per deciliter or more, an increase of 1.0 mg per deciliter or more, and a change in the creatinine concentration from day 0 to day 7.

Results The creatinine concentration increased significantly less in patients who received iodixanol. From day 0 to day 3, the mean peak increase in creatinine was 0.13 mg per deciliter in the iodixanol group and 0.55 mg per deciliter in the iohexol group (P=0.001; the increase with iodixanol minus the increase with iohexol, –0.42 mg per deciliter [95 percent confidence interval, –0.73 to –0.22]). Two of the 64 patients in the iodixanol group (3 percent) had an increase in the creatinine concentration of 0.5 mg per deciliter or more, as compared with 17 of the 65 patients in the iohexol group (26 percent) (P=0.002; odds ratio for such an increase in the iodixanol group, 0.09 [95 percent confidence interval, 0.02 to 0.41]). No patient receiving iodixanol had an increase of 1.0 mg per deciliter or more, but 10 patients in the iohexol group (15 percent) did. The mean change in the creatinine concentration from day 0 to day 7 was 0.07 mg per deciliter in the iodixanol group and 0.24 mg per deciliter in the iohexol group (P=0.003; value in the iodixanol group minus the value in the iohexol group, –0.17 mg per deciliter [95 percent confidence interval, –0.34 to –0.07]).

Conclusions Nephropathy induced by contrast medium may be less likely to develop in high-risk patients when iodixanol is used rather than a low-osmolar, nonionic contrast medium.

The incidence of nephropathy induced by low-osmolar contrast medium is low in the general population and has been calculated to be less than 2 percent.³ Patients at increased risk include those with renal impairment and diabetes, especially in combination.^8,10,13 In such patients, the incidence is significantly higher, in the range of 12 to 50 percent.^{2,4,8,10,14,15,16,17,18} Large clinical studies and meta-analyses have indicated that the use of low-osmolar contrast medium substantially reduces the risk of nephropathy in high-risk patients as compared with the use of high-osmolar contrast medium.^{8,9,11,14,19,20}

Iodixanol, a nonionic, dimeric contrast medium, is iso-osmolar to blood at all concentrations, and its level of general toxicity is lower than that of low-osmolar contrast mediums.^21,22,23 Extensive investigations of iodixanol in low-risk patients (patients without diabetes who have normal renal function) have shown no difference between the frequency of nephropathy associated with iodixanol and that of nephropathy associated with low-osmolar contrast mediums.^3,21,24 This absence of difference may reflect the low risk of nephropathy in low-risk patients.⁷ Two small studies found no differences in renal toxicity between iodixanol and low-osmolar contrast mediums used in angiography in patients without diabetes who had renal failure.^25,26 The first study indicating a reduced incidence of nephropathy with iodixanol in patients with renal impairment (one third of whom had diabetes) was reported by Chalmers and Jackson, who found that iodixanol was less than half as nephrotoxic as iohexol.²⁷ We performed a randomized, prospective, double-blind, multicenter study comparing the nephrotoxicity of iodixanol with that of iohexol in patients with stable diabetes mellitus and impaired renal function who underwent coronary or aortofemoral angiography.

Methods

Study Patients

Patients were considered to be eligible for the study if they were older than 18 years of age, had been referred for coronary or aortofemoral angiography, had diabetes mellitus (type 1 or 2) that was being treated with insulin or oral antidiabetic drugs, and had either a stable serum creatinine concentration (1.5 to 3.5 mg per deciliter [133 to 308 µmol per liter] for men and 1.3 to 3.5 mg per deciliter [115 to 308 µmol per liter] for women) as measured within three months before enrollment or a calculated creatinine clearance of no more than 60 ml per minute, according to the formula of Cockcroft and Gault. Criteria for exclusion were pregnancy, lactation, intravascular administration of an iodinated contrast medium within the previous seven days, treatment with metformin or nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs within the previous 48 hours, intake of nephrotoxic drugs within the previous seven days, history of serious reactions to iodinated contrast mediums, newly discovered unstable diabetes, severe concomitant disease, renal transplantation, or end-stage renal disease necessitating dialysis. Written informed consent was obtained from each patient before enrollment.

Study Protocol

The study was conducted in 17 centers in five European countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, and Sweden). It was designed to compare the renal effects of a nonionic, iso-osmolar, dimeric contrast medium, iodixanol (320 mg of iodine per milliliter; 290 mOsm per kilogram of water [Visipaque, Amersham Health]), with those of the nonionic, low-osmolar, monomeric contrast medium iohexol (350 mg of iodine per milliliter; 780 mOsm per kilogram of water [Omnipaque, Amersham Health]).

Each patient was randomly assigned to receive one of the two contrast mediums, which were placed in identical vials to ensure blinding. The volume used varied among patients and was not standardized. All patients were to be well hydrated before angiography, according to local regimens. It was recommended, but not required, that patients receive 500 ml of water orally, 500 ml of saline intravenously, or both before the angiography, followed by 1 liter of 0.9 percent saline or similar fluids intravenously from the start of the procedure.

The follow-up period was seven days. Serum creatinine was measured before examination (at base line, or day 0) and on days 2, 3, and 7. Morning urine samples were collected on days 0, 2, and 7 for measurement of albumin and the renal tubular enzymes N-acetyl--glucosaminidase and alkaline phosphatase. Data from these urinalyses were correlated with the urine creatinine concentration. A central laboratory performed all analyses. Patients were observed and questioned regarding adverse events and were instructed to report any symptoms. All adverse events were recorded during the seven-day follow-up period.

The primary end point was the peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration between day 0 (when contrast medium was administered) and day 3. Secondary end points were the number of patients with a peak increase of at least 0.5 mg per deciliter and the number with a peak increase of at least 1.0 mg per deciliter (88.4 µmol per liter) during days 0 through 3 (these are the two increments that are most commonly used to define nephrotoxic effects), as well as the change in the serum creatinine concentration from day 0 to day 7. The protocol was approved by the ethics committee of each institution and by the health authorities in accordance with the national regulations in each country.

Statistical Analysis

For the calculation of the sample size, we assumed a base-line serum creatinine concentration of 1.8 mg per deciliter (159.1 µmol per liter). Assuming a peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration of 25 percent for iohexol and 15 percent for iodixanol and a common standard deviation for the increase of 0.35 mg per deciliter (30.9 µmol per liter), the inclusion of 61 subjects in each group allowed for a two-sided significance level of 5 percent and 80 percent power, assuming a normal distribution. All the 95 percent confidence intervals except those for the odds ratios were determined by the bootstrap method.²⁸

The statistical analyses of the peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration from day 0 to day 3, the change in the concentration from day 0 to day 7, and the changes in urine variables from base line to day 2 and from base line to day 7 were performed with the use of a linear regression in which the covariates were the contrast-medium group, age, base-line serum creatinine concentration, total dose administered (grams of iodine), and center. Only the significant covariates were included in the final model. This analysis assumes a normal distribution of increases in the creatinine concentration. Since some patients had a significantly greater increase in serum creatinine than others, a natural logarithmic transformation was performed for all serum creatinine measures, so that the assumption of normal distribution would be closer to being met. When this transformation is used, the results are measures of relative change rather than absolute change. First-order interactions, except for interactions with center, were included in the model. The number of subjects with a peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration of 1.0 mg per deciliter or more between day 0 and day 3 and the number with a peak increase of 0.5 mg per deciliter or more between day 0 and day 3 were analyzed by logistic regression with the covariates listed above. No interim analysis was performed.

Results

Study Patients

Between January 1999 and September 2001, 135 patients from 17 centers (median number per center, 8; range, 1 to 18) were enrolled in the study. Of the 135 patients, 6 patients from four different centers were excluded from per-protocol analyses because of major protocol violations. Of the 129 patients in whom the protocol was followed and who were evaluated for renal outcomes, 64 received iodixanol and 65 received iohexol. The two groups appeared to be clinically similar with regard to demographic and other base-line characteristics, although there were statistically significant differences in mean body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) and in the duration of diabetes (Table 1).

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 1. Demographic and Base-Line Characteristics of the Patients.

 
Effect on Serum Creatinine Concentration

Iodixanol induced a significantly smaller mean increase in the serum creatinine concentration than did iohexol. The peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration within three days after the administration of contrast medium was 0.13 mg per deciliter (11.2 µmol per liter) in the iodixanol group, as compared with 0.55 mg per deciliter (48.2 µmol per liter) in the iohexol group (P=0.001); the increase with iodixanol minus the increase with iohexol was –0.42 mg per deciliter (–37.0 µmol per liter) (95 percent confidence interval, –0.73 to –0.22 mg per deciliter [–64.9 to –19.8 µmol per liter]) (Table 2). The effect of the base-line serum creatinine concentration was different in the two groups. Among patients who received iohexol, but not among those who received iodixanol, a higher base-line serum creatinine concentration was associated with a higher peak increase between day 0 and day 3 (P for interaction <0.001).

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 2. Peak Increase in the Serum Creatinine Concentration from Base Line to Day 3.

 
The secondary end points also showed that iodixanol was significantly less nephrotoxic than iohexol. The mean change in the serum creatinine concentration between day 0 and day 7 (when it was measured in 116 patients) was 0.07 mg per deciliter (6.3 µmol per liter) in the iodixanol group and 0.24 mg per deciliter (21.4 µmol per liter) in the iohexol group (P=0.003); the increase with iodixanol minus the increase with iohexol was –0.17 mg per deciliter (–15.1 µmol per liter) (95 percent confidence interval, –0.34 to –0.07 mg per deciliter [–30.2 to –6.0 µmol per liter]). When the most common definition of contrast-medium–induced nephropathy (an increase in the serum creatinine concentration of at least 0.5 mg per deciliter) was used, the incidence of nephropathy was 3 percent in the iodixanol group (2 of 64 patients) and 26 percent in the iohexol group (17 of 65 patients) (P=0.002). The odds ratio for nephropathy in the iodixanol group as compared with the iohexol group was 0.09 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.02 to 0.41). Ten patients in the iohexol group (15 percent) but none in the iodixanol group had an increase in serum creatinine concentration of at least 1.0 mg per deciliter (Figure 1).

View larger version (4K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Differences in Nephrotoxicity between Iodixanol and Iohexol. The bars show the numbers of patients with a maximal increase in the serum creatinine concentration between day 0 and day 3 of at least 0.5 mg per deciliter and at least 1.0 mg per deciliter, which are the two most common increments used to define nephropathy.

 
Effect on Urine Variables

At base line, 10 patients in the iodixanol group and 23 in the iohexol group had urinary excretion of at least 50 mg of albumin per millimole of creatinine, meeting the criteria for proteinuria. However, a high ratio of urinary albumin to creatinine did not correlate with a high peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration. Neither contrast medium resulted in a significant change in the excretion of the urinary enzymes N-acetyl--glucosaminidase and alkaline phosphatase from base line to day 2 or day 7.

Adverse Events

A total of 42 adverse events occurred in 31 of the 135 enrolled patients (23 percent) — 13 in the iodixanol group and 29 in the iohexol group (Table 3). All seven serious events deemed to be related to contrast medium occurred in the iohexol group; five patients in this group had acute renal failure related to the use of iohexol, and one patient had both acute renal failure and arrhythmia related to the use of iohexol. Three of these six patients recovered, two died, and one had persistent renal failure.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 3. Adverse Events in 134 Patients in the Intention-to-Treat Population.

 
Discussion

Our study found that the use of iodixanol resulted in a significantly smaller increase in the serum creatinine concentration than did the use of iohexol. The peak increase in the serum creatinine concentration between day 0 and day 3 was significantly lower in the iodixanol group than in the iohexol group. The difference was also significant at day 7. The incidence of contrast-medium–induced nephropathy, defined as an increase in the serum creatinine concentration of 0.5 mg per deciliter or more, was 3 percent in the iodixanol group and 26 percent in the iohexol group. The odds of nephropathy were 11 times as high with iohexol as with iodixanol. An increase in the serum creatinine concentration of 1.0 mg per deciliter or more did not occur in any patient in the iodixanol group but occurred in 15 percent of those in the iohexol group.

The first study to suggest that there was a reduced incidence of nephropathy with iodixanol was published by Chalmers and Jackson, who investigated 124 patients with serum creatinine concentrations of more than 1.7 mg per deciliter (150 µmol per liter), one third of whom had diabetes.²⁷ In that unblinded study, patients were randomly assigned prospectively to receive either iodixanol or iohexol; the incidence of nephropathy (defined by an increase of 25 percent or more in the serum creatinine concentration) in the iodixanol group (3.7 percent) was less than half that in the iohexol group (10.0 percent). Our double-blind, randomized, controlled study not only confirms those results but also extends them to a population at higher risk for contrast-medium–induced nephropathy.

Why iso-osmolar contrast mediums are less nephrotoxic than low-osmolar contrast mediums is unclear. The difference might be explained by differences in either the osmolality or the chemotoxicity of the contrast mediums or their ionic composition.^3,15,29 The osmotic diuresis induced by low-osmolar mediums is generally greater than that induced by iso-osmolar mediums. This diuresis may enhance distal sodium delivery, increasing medullary work and inducing hypoxia or volume depletion, with consequent activation of vasoregulatory hormones. If these vasoregulatory mechanisms are impaired (e.g., in patients with diabetes, renal impairment, or both), such impairment might be a major cause of renal damage after exposure to contrast medium and could explain the benefit of iso-osmolar contrast mediums.^30,31

That osmolality is an important factor in contrast-medium–induced nephropathy is supported by several studies. In a prospective, randomized study involving 1196 patients who underwent angiocardiography, Rudnick et al.⁸ found no differences in the incidence of nephropathy (defined as an increase of 0.5 mg per deciliter or more in the serum creatinine concentration within 72 hours after the administration of contrast medium) between patients receiving iohexol (low-osmolar; 780 mOsm per kilogram of water) and patients receiving diatrizoate (high-osmolar; 1870 mOsm per kilogram of water) among low-risk patients (patients without diabetes who had a base-line serum creatinine concentration of less than 1.5 mg per deciliter [133 µmol per liter]). However, among patients without diabetes whose serum creatinine concentrations were higher than 1.5 mg per deciliter, the incidence of nephropathy was reduced from 27.0 to 12.2 percent by the use of iohexol.⁸ Among patients with diabetes, the incidence was reduced from 47.7 to 33.3 percent. Overall, patients receiving high-osmolar contrast medium were 3.3 times as likely to have nephropathy induced by contrast medium as those receiving low-osmolar contrast medium.⁸ Our finding of a 26 percent incidence of nephropathy with iohexol is in agreement with the results of the study by Rudnick et al. Barrett and Carlisle performed a meta-analysis to determine the relative nephrotoxicity of contrast mediums using the results of 14 trials and concluded that the use of low-osmolar contrast medium rather than high-osmolar contrast medium was beneficial to patients with preexisting renal failure.²⁰

In our study, base-line urinary albumin excretion did not correlate with the base-line serum creatinine concentration and was not a predictor of nephropathy. Our findings indicate that patients with a high base-line serum creatinine concentration and diabetic nephropathy were at lower risk when iodixanol was used.

The finding of a reduced incidence of nephropathy with the use of iodixanol presents an apparent contradiction to some of the experimental studies in rats that claim that the high viscosity of dimeric contrast mediums might be a risk factor because it might cause stasis in renal tubules.³² Our data also contradict some of the experimental studies in dogs, in which the use of iso-osmolar contrast medium conferred no advantage.^33,34 These differences may reflect the difficulty of translating to patients the results of studies in animals.

Several approaches to the prevention of nephropathy induced by contrast medium have been reported, of which vigorous hydration may be the most important.^5,29 Some medications, such as diuretics, mannitol, dopamine, calcium-channel blockers, endothelin-receptor antagonists, theophylline, and prostaglandin, have been tried without major success.^{11,35,36,37,38} Efforts to prevent nephropathy by administering acetylcysteine before the administration of contrast medium have been discussed elsewhere.^39,40 Acetylcysteine, a free-radical scavenger, has been shown to be renoprotective in some studies^41,42 but not in others.^43,44 In our study, only four patients in the iodixanol group and seven in the iohexol group received acetylcysteine. Exclusion of these patients from the analysis of the primary end point did not affect the results. A selective dopamine-1–receptor agonist, fenoldopam, has been reported to be useful in preventing contrast-medium–induced nephropathy.⁴⁵ Kini et al.⁴⁶ reported a protective effect of fenoldopam in patients with diabetes and impaired renal function who were undergoing coronary angiography; they found a 4 percent incidence of nephropathy, defined as a 25 percent increase in the serum creatinine concentration. However, that study was retrospective and lacked a control group.⁴⁶

Table 4 summarizes published data from controlled studies in which low-osmolar contrast mediums were used in patients with diabetes and renal impairment. Our study, which found a 3 percent incidence of contrast-medium–induced nephropathy with iodixanol, appears to have had a better outcome than previous studies that used low-osmolar contrast medium alone. The incidence of nephropathy in the iohexol group is consistent with earlier published results for similar groups of patients.^8,9,11,14,20 The results in our iodixanol group were similar to or better than those in studies that included low-osmolar contrast mediums and acetylcysteine or fenoldopam. The use of iodixanol alone may eliminate many of the adverse effects or logistic problems created when prophylactic pharmacologic regimens are used. Thus, the likelihood that contrast-medium–induced nephropathy will develop in high-risk patients appears to be significantly reduced when iodixanol, an iso-osmolar contrast medium, is used rather than a low-osmolar nonionic contrast medium.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 4. Contrast-Medium–Induced Nephropathy in Patients with Diabetes in Controlled Studies with Low-Osmolar Contrast Mediums.

 

Supported by Amersham Health.

^* Other investigators in the Nephrotoxicity in High-Risk Patients Study of Iso-Osmolar and Low-Osmolar Non-Ionic Contrast Media (NEPHRIC Study) are listed in the Appendix.

Source Information

From the Department of Radiology, Huddinge University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden (P. Aspelin); the Department of Cardiology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Bichat, Paris (P. Aubry); the Department of Thoracic Radiology, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden (S.-G.F.); the Medizinische Klinik II–Kardiologie Herzzentrum, Technische Universität, Dresden, Germany (R.S.); the Department of Cardiology, Franz-Volhard-Klinik, Helios Kliniken, Berlin, Germany (R.W.); and the Laboratory for Renal Physiology, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway (K.J.B.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Aspelin at the Department of Radiology, Huddinge University Hospital, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden, or at peter.aspelin{at}cfss.ki.se.

References

1. Turney JH. Acute renal failure -- a dangerous condition. JAMA 1996;275:1516-1517.
2. Rihal CS, Textor SC, Grill DE, et al. Incidence and prognostic importance of acute renal failure after percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation 2002;105:2259-2264.
3. Berg KJ. Nephrotoxicity related to contrast media. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2000;34:317-322.
4. Cochran ST, Wong WS, Roe DJ. Predicting angiography-induced acute renal function impairment: clinical risk model. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1983;141:1027-1033.
5. Morcos SK, Thomsen HS, Webb JA. Contrast-media-induced nephrotoxicity: a consensus report. Eur Radiol 1999;9:1602-1613.
6. Waybill MM, Waybill PN. Contrast media-induced nephrotoxicity: identification of patients at risk and algorithms for prevention. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2001;12:3-9.
7. Barrett BJ, Parfrey PS, Vavasour HM, et al. Contrast nephropathy in patients with impaired renal function: high versus low osmolar media. Kidney Int 1992;41:1274-1279.
8. Rudnick MR, Goldfarb S, Wexler L, et al. Nephrotoxicity of ionic and nonionic contrast media in 1196 patients: a randomized trial: the Iohexol Cooperative Study. Kidney Int 1995;47:254-261.
9. Taliercio CP, Vlietstra RE, Ilstrup DM, et al. A randomized comparison of the nephrotoxicity of iopamidol and diatrizoate in high risk patients undergoing cardiac angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;17:384-390.
10. Manske CL, Sprafka JM, Strony JT, Wang Y. Contrast nephropathy in azotemic diabetic patients undergoing coronary angiography. Am J Med 1990;89:615-620.
11. Wang A, Holcslaw T, Bashore TM, et al. Exacerbation of radiocontrast nephrotoxicity by endothelin receptor antagonism. Kidney Int 2000;57:1675-1680.
12. Levy EM, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI. The effect of acute renal failure on mortality: a cohort analysis. JAMA 1996;275:1489-1494.
13. McCullough PA, Wolyn R, Rocher LL, Levin RN, O'Neill WW. Acute renal failure after coronary intervention: incidence, risk factors, and relationship to mortality. Am J Med 1997;103:368-375.
14. Lautin EM, Freeman NJ, Schoenfeld AH, et al. Radiocontrast-associated renal dysfunction: a comparison of lower-osmolality and conventional high-osmolality contrast media. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;157:59-65. [Erratum, AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;157:895.]
15. Morcos SK. Contrast media-induced nephrotoxicity -- questions and answers. Br J Radiol 1998;71:357-365.
16. Weisberg LS, Kurnik PB, Kurnik BR. Risk of radiocontrast nephropathy in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Kidney Int 1994;45:259-265.
17. Parfrey PS, Griffiths SM, Barrett BJ, et al. Contrast material-induced renal failure in patients with diabetes mellitus, renal insufficiency, or both: a prospective controlled study. N Engl J Med 1989;320:143-149.
18. Schwab SJ, Hlatky MA, Pieper KS, et al. Contrast nephrotoxicity: a randomized controlled trial of a nonionic and an ionic radiographic contrast agent. N Engl J Med 1989;320:149-153.
19. Barrett BJ. Contrast nephrotoxicity. J Am Soc Nephrol 1994;5:125-137.
20. Barrett BJ, Carlisle EJ. Metaanalysis of the relative nephrotoxicity of high- and low-osmolality iodinated contrast media. Radiology 1993;188:171-178.
21. Grynne BH, Nossen JO, Bolstad B, Borch KW. Main results of the first comparative clinical studies on Visipaque. Acta Radiol Suppl 1995;399:265-270.
22. Jakobsen JA. Renal experience with Visipaque. Eur Radiol 1996;6:Suppl 2:S16-S19.
23. Davidson CJ, Laskey WK, Hermilller JB, et al. Randomized trial of contrast media utilization in high-risk PTCA: the COURT trial. Circulation 2000;101:2172-2177.
24. Murakami R, Tajima H, Kumazaki T, Yamamoto K. Effect of iodixanol on renal function immediately after abdominal angiography: clinical comparison with iomeprol and ioxaglate. Acta Radiol 1998;39:368-371.
25. Jakobsen JA, Berg KJ, Kjaersgaard P, et al. Angiography with nonionic X-ray contrast media in severe chronic renal failure: renal failure and contrast retention. Nephron 1996;73:549-556.
26. Carraro M, Malalan F, Antonione R, et al. Effects of a dimeric vs a monomeric nonionic contrast medium on renal function in patients with mild to moderate renal insufficiency: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. Eur Radiol 1998;8:144-147.
27. Chalmers N, Jackson RW. Comparison of iodixanol and iohexol in renal impairment. Br J Radiol 1999;72:701-703.
28. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1993.
29. Katzberg RW. Urography into the 21st century: new contrast media, renal handling, imaging characteristics, and nephrotoxicity. Radiology 1997;204:297-312.
30. Heyman SN, Reichman J, Brezis M. Pathophysiology of radiocontrast nephropathy: a role for medullary hypoxia. Invest Radiol 1999;34:685-691.
31. Brezis M, Rosen S. Hypoxia of the renal medulla -- its implications for disease. N Engl J Med 1995;332:647-655.
32. Ueda J, Nygren A, Hansell P, Erikson U. Influence of contrast media on single nephron glomerular filtration rate in rat kidney: a comparison between diatrizoate, iohexol, ioxaglate, and iotrolan. Acta Radiol 1992;33:596-599.
33. Deray G, Bagnis C, Jacquiaud C, Dubois M, Adabra Y, Jaudon C. Renal effects of low and isoosmolar contrast media on renal hemodynamic in a normal and ischemic dog kidney. Invest Radiol 1999;34:1-4.
34. Lancelot E, Idée J-M, Laclédère C, Santus R, Corot C. Effects of two dimeric iodinated contrast media on renal medullary blood perfusion and oxygenation in dogs. Invest Radiol 2002;37:368-375.
35. Gerlach AT, Pickworth KK. Contrast medium-induced nephrotoxicity: pathophysiology and prevention. Pharmacotherapy 2000;20:540-548.
36. Solomon R, Werner C, Mann D, D'Elia J, Silva P. Effects of saline, mannitol, and furosemide on acute decreases in renal function induced by radiocontrast agents. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1416-1420.
37. Wang YXJ, Jia YF, Chen KM, Morcos SK. Radiographic contrast media induced nephropathy: experimental observations and the protective effect of calcium channel blockers. Br J Radiol 2001;74:1103-1108.
38. Sketch MH Jr, Whelton A, Schollmayer E, et al. Prevention of contrast media-induced renal dysfunction with prostaglandin E1: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Am J Ther 2001;8:155-162.
39. Thomsen HS. Contrast-medium-induced nephrotoxicity: are all answers in for acetylcysteine? Eur Radiol 2001;11:2351-2353.
40. Safirstein R, Andrade L, Vieira JM. Acetylcysteine and nephrotoxic effects of radiographic contrast agents -- a new use for an old drug. N Engl J Med 2000;343:210-212.
41. Tepel M, van der Giet M, Schwarzfeld C, Laufer U, Liermann D, Zidek W. Prevention of radiographic-contrast-agent-induced reductions in renal function by acetylcysteine. N Engl J Med 2000;343:180-184.
42. Diaz-Sandoval LJ, Kosowsky BD, Losordo DW. Acetylcysteine to prevent angiography-related renal tissue injury (the APART trial). Am J Cardiol 2002;89:356-358.
43. Caputo C, Dokko JH, Durham JH, et al. A randomized controlled trial of N-acetylcysteine to prevent contrast nephropathy following coronary angiography. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;39:A14-A14. abstract.
44. Erickson CW, Erickson JE, Wilsker G, Brunner L. A retrospective analysis of oral acetylcysteine intervention to prevent radiographic contrast-induced nephropathy in patients undergoing coronary angiography with elevated serum creatinine. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;39:A16-A16. abstract.
45. Bakris GL, Lass NA, Glock D. Renal hemodynamics in radiocontrast medium-induced renal dysfunction: a role for dopamine-1 receptors. Kidney Int 1999;56:206-210.
46. Kini AS, Mitre CA, Kamran M, et al. Changing trends in incidence and predictors of radiographic contrast nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention with use of fenoldopam. Am J Cardiol 2002;89:999-1002.

In addition to the authors, the other investigators in the NEPHRIC study group are as follows: Denmark: J.K. Madsen, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen; France: G. Grollier, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Caen, Caen; J.-M. Fauvel, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rangueil, Toulouse; J.-L. Bonnet, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de la Timone, Marseilles; J.-P. Beregi, Centre Hospitalier Général de Valenciennes, Valenciennes; Germany: J. vom Dahl, Klinikum der Technische Hochschule, Aachen; J. Petersen, Herzzentrum, Bad Krozingen; W. Rutsch, Universitätsklinikum Charité, Berlin; C. Özbek, Herzzentrum Klinikum Völklingen, Völklingen; Spain: A. Betriú, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona; C. Macaya, Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Madrid; Sweden: B. Lindvall, Huddinge University Hospital, Stockholm; B. Calissendorff, Huddinge University Hospital, Stockholm.

Abstract PDF PDA Full Text PowerPoint Slide Set Editorial by Sandler, C. M. Letters Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear PubMed Citation

Related Letters:

Nephropathy Induced by Contrast Medium
Gruber S. J., Shapiro C. J., Braun C., Birck R., Bridges C. M., Swaroop V. S., Cuddihy M.-T., Aspelin P., Berg K. J.
Extract | Full Text | PDF  
N Engl J Med 2003; 348:2257-2259, May 29, 2003. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Baumgarten, D. A., Ellis, J. H. (2008). Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: Contrast Material Not Required?. Am. J. Roentgenol. 191: 383-386 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Jo, S.-H., Koo, B.-K., Youn, T.-J., Kim, H.-S. (2008). Conclusion of recent 'osmolality trials' in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy by NAC--what is the standard?. Nephrol Dial Transplant 23: 2424-2424 [Full Text]  
• Kimmel, M., Alscher, D. M. (2008). Reply. Nephrol Dial Transplant 23: 2424-2425 [Full Text]  
• Kuhn, M. J., Chen, N., Sahani, D. V., Reimer, D., van Beek, E. J. R., Heiken, J. P., So, G. J. (2008). The PREDICT Study: A Randomized Double-Blind Comparison of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy After Low- or Isoosmolar Contrast Agent Exposure. Am. J. Roentgenol. 191: 151-157 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Nguyen, S. A., Suranyi, P., Ravenel, J. G., Randall, P. K., Romano, P. B., Strom, K. A., Costello, P., Schoepf, U. J. (2008). Iso-Osmolality versus Low-Osmolality Iodinated Contrast Medium at Intravenous Contrast-enhanced CT: Effect on Kidney Function. Radiology 248: 97-105 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Weisbord, S. D., Mor, M. K., Resnick, A. L., Hartwig, K. C., Sonel, A. F., Fine, M. J., Palevsky, P. M. (2008). Prevention, Incidence, and Outcomes of Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury. Arch Intern Med 168: 1325-1332 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kheda, M. F., Szerlip, H. M. (2008). Two cases of iodixanol-induced pancreatitis. NDT Plus 0: sfn063v1-sfn063 [Full Text]  
• Mockel, M., Radovic, M., Kuhnle, Y., Combe, V., Waigand, J., Schroder, S., Dietz, R., Frei, U., Eckardt, K.-U. (2008). Acute renal haemodynamic effects of radiocontrast media in patients undergoing left ventricular and coronary angiography. Nephrol Dial Transplant 23: 1588-1594 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• McCullough, P. A. (2008). Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury. J Am Coll Cardiol 51: 1419-1428 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kimmel, M., Butscheid, M., Brenner, S., Kuhlmann, U., Klotz, U., Alscher, D. M. (2008). Improved estimation of glomerular filtration rate by serum cystatin C in preventing contrast induced nephropathy by N-acetylcysteine or zinc--preliminary results. Nephrol Dial Transplant 23: 1241-1245 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gottlieb, I., Lima, J. A.C. (2008). Screening High-Risk Patients With Computed Tomography Angiography. Circulation 117: 1318-1332 [Full Text]  
• Ritz, E. (2008). Cardiovascular Literature--Beyond Nephrology. CJASN 3: 317-323 [Full Text]  
• Kelly, A. M., Dwamena, B., Cronin, P., Bernstein, S. J., Carlos, R. C. (2008). Meta-analysis: Effectiveness of Drugs for Preventing Contrast-Induced Nephropathy. ANN INTERN MED 148: 284-294 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Rudnick, M., Feldman, H. (2008). Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: What Are the True Clinical Consequences?. CJASN 3: 263-272 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Wilson, J. M., Willerson, J. T. (2008). Myocardial Revascularization with Percutaneous Devices. Card Surg Adult 3: 573-598 [Full Text]  
• Tsai, I-C., Lee, T., Tsai, W.-L., Chen, M.-C., Wu, M.-J., Lee, W.-L., Ting, H.-J. (2008). Contrast Enhancement in Cardiac MDCT: Comparison of Iodixanol 320 Versus Iohexol 350. Am. J. Roentgenol. 190: W47-W53 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Seeliger, E., Flemming, B., Wronski, T., Ladwig, M., Arakelyan, K., Godes, M., Mockel, M., Persson, P. B. (2007). Viscosity of Contrast Media Perturbs Renal Hemodynamics. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 18: 2912-2920 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Wong, G. T. C., Irwin, M. G. (2007). Contrast-induced nephropathy. Br J Anaesth 99: 474-483 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Lee, P.-T., Chou, K.-J., Liu, C.-P., Mar, G.-Y., Chen, C.-L., Hsu, C.-Y., Fang, H.-C., Chung, H.-M. (2007). Renal Protection for Coronary Angiography in Advanced Renal Failure Patients by Prophylactic Hemodialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 50: 1015-1020 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Fernandez Cabezudo, M J, Petroianu, G, Al-Ramadi, B, Langer, R D (2007). Iosimenol, a new non-ionic dimeric contrast medium, does not induce immunoreactivity in the popliteal lymph node assay. Br. J. Radiol. 80: 713-718 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Solomon, R. (2007). Contrast media nephropathy--how to diagnose and how to prevent?. Nephrol Dial Transplant 22: 1812-1815 [Full Text]  
• Solomon, R. J., Natarajan, M. K., Doucet, S., Sharma, S. K., Staniloae, C. S., Katholi, R. E., Gelormini, J. L., Labinaz, M., Moreyra, A. E., the Investigators of the CARE Study, (2007). Cardiac Angiography in Renally Impaired Patients (CARE) Study: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease. Circulation 115: 3189-3196 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Park, K. W., Koo, B.-K., Kim, H.-L., Kim, Y.-S., Jo, S.-H., Lee, H.-Y., Kang, H.-J., Cho, Y.-S., Chung, W.-Y., Yeon, T.-J., Chae, I.-H., Choi, D.-J., Kim, H.-S., Oh, B.-H., Park, Y.-B. (2007). The incidence and predictors of contrast-induced nephropathy in adequately hydrated elderly patients with impaired renal function. Nephrol Dial Transplant 22: 1794-1795 [Full Text]  
• Deray, G. (2007). Visipaque (iodixanol) and hexabrix (ioxaglate) in renal insufficiency.. J Am Coll Cardiol 49: 1668-1668 [Full Text]  
• Jo, S.-H., Koo, B.-K., Youn, T.-J., Kim, H.-S. (2007). Reply.. J Am Coll Cardiol 49: 1669-1670 [Full Text]  
• Persson, P., Liss, P., Hansell, P. (2007). Evaluation and comparison between visipaque (iodixanol) and hexabrix (ioxaglate) in coronary angiography.. J Am Coll Cardiol 49: 1668-1669 [Full Text]  
• Jo, S. K., Rosner, M. H., Okusa, M. D. (2007). Pharmacologic Treatment of Acute Kidney Injury: Why Drugs Haven't Worked and What Is on the Horizon. CJASN 2: 356-365 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Detrenis, S., Meschi, M., Savazzi, G. (2007). Contrast Nephropathy: Isosmolar and Low-Osmolar Contrast Media. J Am Coll Cardiol 49: 922-922 [Full Text]  
• Venkataraman, R., Kellum, J. A. (2007). Prevention of Acute Renal Failure. Chest 131: 300-308 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Weisbord, S. D., Chen, H., Stone, R. A., Kip, K. E., Fine, M. J., Saul, M. I., Palevsky, P. M. (2006). Associations of Increases in Serum Creatinine with Mortality and Length of Hospital Stay after Coronary Angiography. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 17: 2871-2877 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Mathew, R, Haque, K, Woothipoom, W (2006). Acute renal failure induced by contrast medium: steps towards prevention.. BMJ 333: 539-540 [Full Text]  
• Jo, S.-H., Youn, T.-J., Koo, B.-K., Park, J.-S., Kang, H.-J., Cho, Y.-S., Chung, W.-Y., Joo, G.-W., Chae, I.-H., Choi, D.-J., Oh, B.-H., Lee, M.-M., Park, Y.-B., Kim, H.-S. (2006). Renal Toxicity Evaluation and Comparison Between Visipaque (Iodixanol) and Hexabrix (Ioxaglate) in Patients With Renal Insufficiency Undergoing Coronary Angiography: The RECOVER Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 48: 924-930 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Schachner, T., Bonatti, J., Bonaros, N., Poeltl, R., Feuchtner, G., Laufer, G., Pachinger, O., Friedrich, G. (2006). Risk factors of postoperative nephropathy in patients undergoing innovative CABG and intraoperative graft angiography.. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 30: 431-435 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Chertow, G. M., Palevsky, P. M., Greene, T. (2006). Studying the Prevention of Acute Kidney Injury: Lessons from an 18th-Century Mathematician. CJASN 1: 1124-1127 [Full Text]  
• McCullough, P. A., Bertrand, M. E., Brinker, J. A., Stacul, F. (2006). A Meta-Analysis of the Renal Safety of Isosmolar Iodixanol Compared With Low-Osmolar Contrast Media. J Am Coll Cardiol 48: 692-699 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Dussol, B., Morange, S., Loundoun, A., Auquier, P., Berland, Y. (2006). A randomized trial of saline hydration to prevent contrast nephropathy in chronic renal failure patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 21: 2120-2126 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Becker, J., Thompson, H., Remy-Jardin, M., Remy, J., Dequiedt, P. (2006). Renal Safety of Gadolinium-based Contrast Agent for Ionizing Radiation Imaging.. Radiology 240: 301-302 [Full Text]  
• Schild, H. H., Kuhl, C. K., Hubner-Steiner, U., Bohm, I., Speck, U. (2006). Adverse Events after Unenhanced and Monomeric and Dimeric Contrast-enhanced CT: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. Radiology 240: 56-64 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Pannu, N., Wiebe, N., Tonelli, M., for the Alberta Kidney Disease Network, (2006). Prophylaxis Strategies for Contrast-Induced Nephropathy. JAMA 295: 2765-2779 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Downes, M. O., Heinrich, M., Uder, M. (2006). In vitro study of various iodinated contrast media.. Radiology 239: 918-921 [Full Text]  
• Dittrich, E., Puttinger, H., Schillinger, M., Lang, I., Stefenelli, T., Horl, W. H., Vychytil, A. (2006). Effect of radio contrast media on residual renal function in peritoneal dialysis patients--a prospective study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 21: 1334-1339 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Tepel, M., Aspelin, P., Lameire, N. (2006). Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: A Clinical and Evidence-Based Approach. Circulation 113: 1799-1806 [Full Text]  
• Moranne, O., Willoteaux, S., Pagniez, D., Dequiedt, P., Boulanger, E. (2006). Effect of iodinated contrast agents on residual renal function in PD patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 21: 1040-1045 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Wysowski, D. K., Nourjah, P. (2006). Deaths attributed to x-ray contrast media on u.s. Death certificates.. Am. J. Roentgenol. 186: 613-615 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Williams, M. E. (2006). Coronary Revascularization in Diabetic Chronic Kidney Disease/End-Stage Renal Disease: A Nephrologist's Perspective. CJASN 1: 209-220 [Full Text]  
• Remy-Jardin, M., Bahepar, J., Lafitte, J.-J., Dequiedt, P., Ertzbischoff, O., Bruzzi, J., Delannoy-Deken, V., Duhamel, A., Remy, J. (2006). Multi-Detector Row CT Angiography of Pulmonary Circulation with Gadolinium-based Contrast Agents: Prospective Evaluation in 60 Patients. Radiology 238: 1022-1035 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Barrett, B. J., Parfrey, P. S. (2006). Preventing Nephropathy Induced by Contrast Medium. NEJM 354: 379-386 [Full Text]  
• Rosner, M. H., Okusa, M. D. (2006). Acute Kidney Injury Associated with Cardiac Surgery. CJASN 1: 19-32 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Detrenis, S., Meschi, M., Musini, S., Savazzi, G. (2005). Lights and shadows on the pathogenesis of contrast-induced nephropathy: state of the art. Nephrol Dial Transplant 20: 1542-1550 [Full Text]  
• Aoki, J., Ong, A. T.L., Hoye, A., van Herwerden, L. A., Sousa, J. E., Jatene, A., Bonnier, J. J.R.M., Schonberger, J. P.M.A., Buller, N., Bonser, R., Lindeboom, W., Unger, F., Serruys, P. W. (2005). Five year clinical effect of coronary stenting and coronary artery bypass grafting in renal insufficient patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from ARTS trial. Eur Heart J 26: 1488-1493 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Brinker, J. A., Davidson, C. J., Laskey, W. (2005). Preventing in-hospital cardiac and renal complications in high-risk PCI patients. Eur Heart J Suppl 7: G13-G24 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Heinrich, M. C., Kuhlmann, M. K., Grgic, A., Heckmann, M., Kramann, B., Uder, M. (2005). Cytotoxic Effects of Ionic High-osmolar, Nonionic Monomeric, and Nonionic Iso-osmolar Dimeric Iodinated Contrast Media on Renal Tubular Cells in Vitro. Radiology 235: 843-849 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Goldenberg, I., Matetzky, S. (2005). Nephropathy induced by contrast media: pathogenesis, risk factors and preventive strategies. CMAJ 172: 1461-1471 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Weisbord, S. D., Palevsky, P. M. (2005). Radiocontrast-Induced Acute Renal Failure. J Intensive Care Med 20: 63-75 [Abstract]  
• Zhang, H. L., Khilnani, N. M., Prince, M. R., Winchester, P. A., Golia, P., Veit, P., Watts, R., Wang, Y. (2005). Diagnostic Accuracy of Time-Resolved 2D Projection MR Angiography for Symptomatic Infrapopliteal Arterial Occlusive Disease. Am. J. Roentgenol. 184: 938-947 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Goodman, L. R., Gulsun, M., Nagy, P., Washington, L. (2005). CT of Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolus: Does Iso-osmolar Contrast Agent Improve Vascular Opacification?. Radiology 234: 923-928 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bedard, J. P., Blais, C., Patenaude, Y. G., Monga, E. (2005). Pulmonary Embolism: Prospective Comparison of Iso-osmolar and Low-Osmolarity Nonionic Contrast Agents for Contrast Enhancement at CT Angiography. Radiology 234: 929-933 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gross, J. L., de Azevedo, M. J., Silveiro, S. P., Canani, L. H., Caramori, M. L., Zelmanovitz, T. (2005). Diabetic Nephropathy: Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment. Diabetes Care 28: 164-176 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gleeson, T. G., Bulugahapitiya, S. (2004). Contrast-Induced Nephropathy. Am. J. Roentgenol. 183: 1673-1689 [Full Text]  
• Asif, A., Epstein, D. L., Epstein, M. (2004). Dopamine-1 Receptor Agonist: Renal Effects and Its Potential Role in the Management of Radiocontrast-Induced Nephropathy. J Clin Pharmacol 44: 1342-1351 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Maeder, M., Klein, M., Fehr, T., Rickli, H. (2004). Contrast nephropathy: Review focusing on prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol 44: 1763-1771 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Spargias, K., Alexopoulos, E., Kyrzopoulos, S., Iacovis, P., Greenwood, D. C., Manginas, A., Voudris, V., Pavlides, G., Buller, C. E., Kremastinos, D., Cokkinos, D. V. (2004). Ascorbic Acid Prevents Contrast-Mediated Nephropathy in Patients With Renal Dysfunction Undergoing Coronary Angiography or Intervention. Circulation 110: 2837-2842 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gupta, R., Birnbaum, Y., Uretsky, B. F. (2004). The renal patient with coronary artery disease: Current concepts and dilemmas. J Am Coll Cardiol 44: 1343-1353 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bettmann, M. A. (2004). Frequently Asked Questions: Iodinated Contrast Agents. RadioGraphics 24: S3-S10 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Messiou, C, Chalmers, A G (2004). Imaging in acute pancreatitis. Imaging 16: 314-322 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Briguori, C., Colombo, A., Airoldi, F., Violante, A., Castelli, A., Balestrieri, P., Paolo Elia, P., Golia, B., Lepore, S., Riviezzo, G., Scarpato, P., Librera, M., Focaccio, A., Ricciardelli, B. (2004). N-acetylcysteine versus fenoldopam mesylate to prevent contrast agent-associated nephrotoxicity. J Am Coll Cardiol 44: 762-765 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Roditi, G H, Harold, G (2004). Magnetic resonance angiography and computed tomography angiography for peripheral arterial disease. Imaging 16: 205-229 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gradinscak, D. J., Young, N., Jones, Y., O'Neil, D., Sindhusake, D. (2004). Risks of Outpatient Angiography and Interventional Procedures: A Prospective Study. Am. J. Roentgenol. 183: 377-381 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Michel, S. J., Fried, A. M., Sinha, S., Willson, J., Bensadoun, E., Arnold, S., Buck, J. L. (2004). Comparison of Iodixanol with Iohexol for Delayed Pelvic Venous Opacification: A Preliminary Study of Potential Use for CT Venography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 183: 123-126 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Koneth, I., Weishaupt, D., Bachli, E. B. (2004). Persistent nephrogram after administration of an isoosmolar contrast medium. Nephrol Dial Transplant 19: 1654-1655 [Full Text]  
• Bettmann, M. A., Dake, M. D., Hopkins, L. N., Katzen, B. T., White, C. J., Eisenhauer, A. C., Pearce, W. H., Rosenfield, K. A., Smalling, R. W., Sos, T. A., Venbrux, A. C. (2004). Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease Conference: Writing Group VI: Revascularization. Circulation 109: 2643-2650 [Full Text]  
• Merten, G. J., Burgess, W. P., Gray, L. V., Holleman, J. H., Roush, T. S., Kowalchuk, G. J., Bersin, R. M., Van Moore, A., Simonton, C. A. III, Rittase, R. A., Norton, H. J., Kennedy, T. P. (2004). Prevention of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy With Sodium Bicarbonate: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 291: 2328-2334 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Cox, C. D., Tsikouris, J. P. (2004). Preventing Contrast Nephropathy: What Is the Best Strategy? A Review of the Literature. J Clin Pharmacol 44: 327-337 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• O'Neill, W. W., Dixon, S. R. (2004). The year in interventional cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 43: 875-890 [Full Text]  
• Briguori, C., Colombo, A., Violante, A., Balestrieri, P., Manganelli, F., Paolo Elia, P., Golia, B., Lepore, S., Riviezzo, G., Scarpato, P., Focaccio, A., Librera, M., Bonizzoni, E., Ricciardelli, B. (2004). Standard vs double dose of N-acetylcysteine to prevent contrast agent associated nephrotoxicity. Eur Heart J 25: 206-211 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Baker, C. S. R., Johnston, A., Baker, L. R. I., Knight, C. J. (2003). Reply. J Am Coll Cardiol 42: 2169-2170 [Full Text]  
• Thomsen, H. S. (2003). Guidelines for Contrast Media from the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Am. J. Roentgenol. 181: 1463-1471 [Full Text]  
• Stone, G. W., McCullough, P. A., Tumlin, J. A., Lepor, N. E., Madyoon, H., Murray, P., Wang, A., Chu, A. A., Schaer, G. L., Stevens, M., Wilensky, R. L., O'Neill, W. W. (2003). Fenoldopam Mesylate for the Prevention of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 290: 2284-2291 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Herzog, C. A. (2003). How to Manage the Renal Patient with Coronary Heart Disease: The Agony and the Ecstasy of Opinion-Based Medicine. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 14: 2556-2572 [Full Text]  
• Thomsen, H S, Morcos, S K (2003). Contrast media and the kidney: European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) Guidelines. Br. J. Radiol. 76: 513-518 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Levine, G. N., Kern, M. J., Berger, P. B., Brown, D. L., Klein, L. W., Kereiakes, D. J., Sanborn, T. A., Jacobs, A. K., for the American Heart Association Diagnostic and, (2003). Management of Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization. ANN INTERN MED 139: 123-136 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Baker, C. S. R., Wragg, A., Kumar, S., De Palma, R., Baker, L. R. I., Knight, C. J. (2003). A rapid protocol for the prevention of contrast-induced renal dysfunction: the RAPPID study. J Am Coll Cardiol 41: 2114-2118 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Gruber, S. J., Shapiro, C. J., Braun, C., Birck, R., Bridges, C. M., Swaroop, V. S., Cuddihy, M.-T., Aspelin, P., Berg, K. J. (2003). Nephropathy Induced by Contrast Medium. NEJM 348: 2257-2259 [Full Text]