Trial reportKorean journal of radiology
Comparison of Iohexol-380 and Iohexol-350 for Coronary CT Angiography: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Phase 3 Trial.
Trial report in Korean journal of radiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-Pitch Coronary CT Angiography at 70 kVp Adopting a Protocol of Low Injection Speed and Low Volume of Contrast Medium.Korean journal of radiologyTrial
- Facile Synthesis of Holmium-Based Nanoparticles as a CT and MRI Dual-Modal Imaging for Cancer Diagnosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- A Glimpse on Trends and Characteristics of Recent Articles Published in theKorean journal of radiology · 2019Article
- Incidence of Breakthrough Reaction in Patients with Prior Acute Allergic-Like Reactions to Iodinated Contrast Media according to the Administration Route.Korean journal of radiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 12 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis multi-center, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of contrast agents iohexol-380 and iohexol-350 for coronary CT angiography in healthy subjects. MATERIALS AND
methodsVolunteers were randomized to receive 420 mgI/kg of either iohexol-350 or iohexol-380 using a flow rate of 4 mL/sec. All adverse events were recorded. Two blinded readers independently reviewed the CT images and conflicting results were resolved by a third reader. Luminal attenuations (ascending aorta, left main coronary artery, and left ventricle) in Hounsfield units (HUs) and image quality on a 4-point scale were calculated.
resultsA total of 225 subjects were given contrast media (115 with iohexol-380 and 110 with iohexol-350). There was no difference in number of adverse drug reactions between groups: 75 events in 56 (48.7%) of 115 subjects in the iohexol-380 group vs. 74 events in 51 (46.4%) of 110 subjects in the iohexol-350 group (p = 0.690). No severe adverse drug reactions were recorded. Neither group showed an increase in serum creatinine. Significant differences in mean density between the groups was found in the ascending aorta: 375.8 ± 71.4 HU with iohexol-380 vs. 356.3 ± 61.5 HU with iohexol-350 (p = 0.030). No significant differences in image quality scores between both groups were observed for all three anatomic evaluations (all, p > 0.05).
conclusionIohexol-380 provides improved enhancement of the ascending aorta and similar attenuation of the coronary arteries without any increase in adverse drug reactions, as compared with iohexol-350 using an identical amount of total iodine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.