Trial reportInternational urology and nephrology2018
Nephrotoxicity of iodixanol versus iopamidol in patients undergoing peripheral angiography with or without endovascular therapy.
Trial report in International urology and nephrology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deconvolution Analysis of the Non-Ionic Iomeprol, Iobitridol and Iodixanol Contrast Media-Treated Human Whole Blood Thermograms: A Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the nephrotoxic effects of iodixanol and iopamidol in patients undergoing peripheral angiography.
methodsPatients scheduled for peripheral angiography were randomly assigned to the iodixanol group (n = 463) and iopamidol group (n = 458). The primary endpoint was the incidence of contrast associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI), which was defined as an increase ≥ 25% or ≥ 44.2 µmol/l (0.5 mg/dl) in serum creatinine (SCr) from baseline within 72 h after receiving contrast media (CM). The secondary endpoints were the mean peak SCr increase within 72 h after receiving CM and major adverse renal events (SCr increased by two times after 30 days, the need for dialysis treatment, rehospitalization for acute renal failure, or kidney-related death) during hospitalization and within 30 day postdischarge.
resultsThe incidence of CA-AKI did not differ significantly between the iodixanol group and iopamidol group (18.1% vs. 16.8%; p = 0.595). There was no significant difference in the mean peak SCr increase between the iodixanol group and iopamidol group (10.4 ± 13.0 vs. 10.6 ± 14.3 µmol/l, p = 0.919). There were four patients [1 (0.2%) patient in the iodixanol group and 1 (0.7%) patients in the iopamidol group, p = 0.609] with doubling of SCr; no other adverse renal events were observed.
conclusionsOur data showed that the nephrotoxicity of iodixanol was comparable with that of iopamidol in patients undergoing peripheral angiography.
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.