Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Nephrol. May 6, 2017; 6(3): 86-99
Published online May 6, 2017. doi: 10.5527/wjn.v6.i3.86
Table 4 Meta-analyses comparing iso-osmolal and low-osmolal contrast media in terms of renal safety
MetaanalysesBaseline renal functionsProcedure/administration routeCompared drugsResults
McCullough et al[104] (16 trials)Both normal GFR and CKDPTCA (intra-arterial)Iodixanol (IOCM) vs various LOCMIodixanol safer than LOCM, e.p. in patients with CKD or CKD + diabetes mellitus
Reed et al[23] (16 trials)Both normal GFR and CKDPTCA + CT (intra-arterial + intravenous)Iodixanol (IOCM) vs various LOCMOverall, no difference. However, iodixanol safer than ioxaglate and iohexol
Heinrich et al[48] (25 trials)Both normal GFR and CKDPTCA + IV urography + CT (intra-arterial + intravenous)Iodixanol (IOCM) vs various LOCMOverall, no difference. However, iodixanol safer than iohexol in CKD patients when CM used via intra-arterial route
From et al[105] (36 trials)Both normal GFR and CKDPTCA + CT (intra-arterial + intravenous)Iodixanol (IOCM) vs various LOCMOverall, no difference. Iodixanol safer than iohexol
Eng et al[24] (29 trials)Both normal GFR and CKDPTCA + IV urography + CT (intra-arterial + intravenous)Iodixanol (IOCM) vs various LOCMIodixanol slightly safer than LOCM but the lower risk did not exceed a minimally important clinical difference