The Crucial Question About Contrast-Induced Nephropathy (CIN): Should It Affect Clinical Practice?

The phenomenon of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) and contrast-associated nephropathy (CAN) has been acknowledged for an extensive duration. Recently, there has been a significant rise in research on the topic due to the enhanced availability of imaging investigations. This theory has been thoroughly validated and extensively reported in the scholarly literature. The primary risk factors are chronic kidney disease, diabetes, sepsis, critical illness, circulatory shock, anemia, advanced age, inadequate hydration, and the use of nephrotoxic medications. The principal preventive strategies are the use of iso-osmolar contrast agents and sufficient hydration, which includes the use of intravenous isotonic saline. The administration of N-acetylcysteine has been shown to decrease the occurrence of CIN without impacting outcomes like mortality or the need for dialysis. Recently, a growing number of scholarly studies have contested this phenomenon, or at least, questioned its clinical significance, rendering it primarily a biochemical occurrence. This review aims to evaluate the previously listed studies. Overestimating the possible dangers of post-contrast nephropathy may diminish the sensitivity of imaging tests that may otherwise utilize contrast, so substantially lowering their clinical relevance. This hypothesis is critically significant to science, medicine, and patients, warranting attention despite the necessity for additional research to validate it. The present study demonstrates that the frequency and importance of CIN may be overestimated.