Related Experiment Videos
Drip infusion urography with meglumine iodamide.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
|December 1, 1978
Summary
Meglumine iodamide 24% provided superior renal calyce opacification compared to meglumine diatrizoate 30% in drip infusion pyelography. Both contrast agents showed similar safety profiles in this double-blind study.
Area of Science:
- Radiology
- Pharmacology
- Nephrology
Background:
- Drip infusion pyelography is a key diagnostic tool.
- Contrast agent properties influence diagnostic accuracy.
- Evaluating new contrast agents is crucial for improved imaging.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of meglumine iodamide 24% and meglumine diatrizoate 30%.
- To assess the degree of renal calyce opacification.
- To evaluate the safety and adverse reactions of both contrast agents.
Main Methods:
- A double-blind study involving 283 patients.
- Patients received either meglumine iodamide 24% or meglumine diatrizoate 30%.
- Contrast agents were infused at 4.5 ml/kg (max 300 ml) over 10 minutes.
Main Results:
- Meglumine iodamide 24% demonstrated significantly greater renal calyce opacification (P < 0.01 to P < 0.001).
- The superiority of iodamide was observed in the early phase of excretion.
- Incidence and nature of adverse reactions and laboratory abnormalities were similar between agents.
Conclusions:
- Meglumine iodamide 24% offers enhanced early-phase opacification in drip infusion pyelography.
- The improved efficacy may relate to renal tubular secretion of iodamide.
- Both contrast agents exhibit comparable safety profiles.