Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 5, 2026

An Experimental and Finite Element Protocol to Investigate the Transport of Neutral and Charged Solutes across Articular Cartilage
Published on: April 23, 2017
Comparison of ionic and low-osmolar contrast media during cardiac catheterization
1Duke University Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Durham, NC 27710, USA.
Insights
Nonionic contrast agents reduce cardiovascular complications during cardiac catheterization compared to ionic contrast. However, their higher cost and similar nephrotoxicity and thrombotic event rates require careful consideration.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Radiology
- Nephrology
Background:
- Ionic contrast agents are commonly used in cardiac catheterization.
- Cardiovascular complications and nephrotoxicity are potential risks associated with contrast agents.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the safety and efficacy of nonionic versus ionic contrast agents in cardiac catheterization.
- To evaluate cardiovascular complications, hemodynamic effects, electrophysiologic effects, nephrotoxicity, and thrombotic events.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing clinical data comparing ionic and nonionic contrast agents.
- Analysis of outcomes including major and minor cardiovascular complications, hemodynamic and electrophysiologic changes, renal function, and thrombotic events.
Main Results:
- Nonionic contrast agents significantly decrease major and minor cardiovascular complications compared to ionic agents.
- Hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects are less pronounced with nonionic agents, particularly in patients with severe coronary artery disease or left ventricular dysfunction.
- Nephrotoxicity and thrombotic event rates appear similar between ionic and nonionic agents, though some benefit for renal dysfunction may exist with nonionic agents.
Conclusions:
- Nonionic contrast agents offer reduced cardiovascular risk during cardiac catheterization.
- The higher cost of nonionic agents must be balanced against their benefits.
- Further research is needed to clarify nephrotoxic differences and outcomes in specific patient populations like those undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.
Abstract:
The use of nonionic contrast agents during cardiac catheterization decreases the incidence of both major and minor cardiovascular complications when compared with ionic contrast. Hemodynamic and electrophysiologic effects are less profound especially in patients who have severe coronary artery disease or left ventricular dysfunction. Sparse data exist comparing ionic and nonionic contrast in patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. No clinical evidence suggests that nonionic contrast agents are less nephrotoxic than ionic contrast though patients with significant baseline renal dysfunction (creatinine > 3.0) might benefit. The incidence of thrombotic events appears to be similar for both types of agents. Finally, the risk reduction of cardiovascular events must be weighed against markedly higher costs.
More Related Videos
07:09Assessment of Pulmonary Capillary Blood Volume, Membrane Diffusing Capacity, and Intrapulmonary Arteriovenous Anastomoses During Exercise
Published on: February 20, 2017
08:13In Vivo Quantitative Assessment of Myocardial Structure, Function, Perfusion and Viability Using Cardiac Micro-computed Tomography
Published on: February 16, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview
Cardiac Catheterization IV: Nursing Management
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography
Cardiac Catheterization III: Left Heart Catheterization
Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT