Published online Oct 14, 2009. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.4788
Revised: August 4, 2009
Accepted: August 11, 2009
Published online: October 14, 2009
AIM: To determine the effects of high osmolarity contrast media (HOCM) and iso-osmolar contrast media (CM) application, with or without pressure, on hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) system.
METHODS: Sixty rats were divided into six equal groups as follows: Group 1: (0.9% NaCl, control), Group 2: (diatrizoate meglumine Na, ionic HOCM, Urographin®), Group 3: (iodixanol, iso-osmolar non-ionic CM, Visipaque®); each of which was applied without pressure, whereas the animals of the remaining three groups (1p, 2p, 3p) were subjected to the same CM with pressure. We performed a duodenal puncture and introduced a catheter into the ampulla. After the catheterization, 0.2 mL CM or 0.9% NaCl was injected with or without pressure. Blood samples were taken for biochemical evaluations. The histopathological examinations of liver, common bile duct, and pancreas were performed.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the six groups for blood amylase, alanine aminotransferases, aspartate aminotransferases, bilirubin levels (P > 0.05). Alkaline phosphatase and γ glutamyl transaminase levels were higher (P < 0.05) in the Urographin® groups (2, 2p) than the Visipaque® groups (3, 3p), or control groups (1, 1p). Hepatocyte necrosis, portal area inflammation, and Kupffer’s cell hyperplasia were higher (P < 0.05) in the study groups than the control group. However, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) between HOCM (2, 2p) and iso-osmolar CM (3, 3p) groups. Bile duct proliferation and regeneration in the Urographin® groups (2, 2p) were significantly higher (P < 0.05) than the Visipaque® groups (3, 3p) or the control groups (1, 1p). Although CM caused minor damage to the pancreas, there were no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05) between the groups. Application of the CM with pressure did not cause additional damage to the HPB system.
CONCLUSION: Iso-osmolar, non-ionic CM could be more reliable than the ionic HOCM, whereas the application of pressure during the CM application had no effect on the HPB system.