๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Comparison of hemodynamic and Doppler echocardiographic effects of a new low osmolar nonionic and a standard ionic contrast agent after left ventriculography

โœ Scribed by Werner, Gerald S. ;Schmidt, Thomas ;Scholz, Karl H. ;Figulla, Hans-R. ;Kreuzer, Heinrich


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1994
Tongue
English
Weight
807 KB
Volume
33
Category
Article
ISSN
0098-6569

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


The hemodynamic effects of a new nonionic low osmolar contrast agent (iomeprol) during left ventriculography (LC) was compared with a standard ionic contrast agent (meglumine diatrizoate) in a randomized double blind study in 30 patients with suspected coronary artery disease and normal systolic ventricular function. LV diastolic function was assessed by Doppler echocardiographic recording of the transmittal filling curve and by intraventricular tip-manometry before and within 30 sec of the LC. In the group receiving the ionic contrast agent the systolic pressure fell from 126 f 23 to 111 ? 18 mmHg (P < 0.05), and heart rate increased from 64 f 9 to 71 f 11 min-' (P < 0.05), while no such effects were observed with the nonionic contrast agent, indicating differences in the vasodilator properties. The latter caused an increase of the peak early Doppler velocity (52 f 11 to 62 f 14 cm/sec; P < 0.05). After the ionic contrast agent, the effect on the peak early Doppler velocity was less pronounced, probably due to an interaction with the known depressant effect of the increase in heart rate on the early Doppler velocity. In both groups the left ventricular enddiastolic pressure was increased from 7 ? 3 to 10 f 4 mmHg. No significant effects on peak -dp/dt and dp/dt were observed in either group.

The nonionic contrast agent iomeprol had no significant effect on systolic arterial pressure and heart rate in contrast to the ionic contrast agent, probably due to a less pronounced vasodilator effect. Despite these differences of the global hemodynamic response, there were similar effects of both contrast agents on LV diastolic filling.


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Effects of an ionic versus a nonionic lo
โœ Piessens, Jan H. ;Stammen, Francis ;Vrolix, Matty C. ;Glazier, James J. ;Benit, ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1993 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 651 KB

An increasing body of evidence suggests that the potential for thrombotic complications is greater with nonionic than with ionic contrast agents. This is a particularly important consideration in the highly thrombogenic setting of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). To explore thi