High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix: Comparison with a conventional contrast agent

R. F. Spataro, Richard W Katzberg, H. W. Fischer, M. J. McMannis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A double-blind clinical trial was performed in 60 patients to compare Hexabrix (ioxaglate meglumine and ioxaglate sodium) and Renografin-60 (diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium). Use of Hexabrix produced higher urinary iodine concentrations, lower urine volumes at 30 minutes, and excretory urograms significantly better in diagnostic quality, as rated by four independent observers. There was no difference in nephrogram quality between contrast agents. Patients receiving Hexabrix had less of an increase in heart rate and demonstrated a slight rise in mean arterial blood pressure, rather than the biphasic rise then fall seen with Renografin-60. There was no significant change for up to 96 hours after urography in results of hematology, clinical chemistry, or urinalysis, except for an increase of 0.005 in urine specific gravity with Renografin-60. Patients reported significantly less body heat, heat in the injection arm, and overall discomfort with Hexabrix. There was a similar amount of nausea and vomiting in the two groups. Hexabrix also caused histaminic-type reactions in three patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)9-14
Number of pages6
JournalRadiology
Volume162
Issue number1
StatePublished - 1987
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ioxaglic Acid
Urography
Osmolar Concentration
Contrast Media
Diatrizoate Meglumine
Arterial Pressure
Hot Temperature
Urine
Clinical Chemistry
Specific Gravity
Urinalysis
Hematology
Iodine
Nausea
Vomiting
Heart Rate
Sodium
Clinical Trials
Injections

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Spataro, R. F., Katzberg, R. W., Fischer, H. W., & McMannis, M. J. (1987). High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix: Comparison with a conventional contrast agent. Radiology, 162(1), 9-14.

High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix : Comparison with a conventional contrast agent. / Spataro, R. F.; Katzberg, Richard W; Fischer, H. W.; McMannis, M. J.

In: Radiology, Vol. 162, No. 1, 1987, p. 9-14.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Spataro, RF, Katzberg, RW, Fischer, HW & McMannis, MJ 1987, 'High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix: Comparison with a conventional contrast agent', Radiology, vol. 162, no. 1, pp. 9-14.
Spataro, R. F. ; Katzberg, Richard W ; Fischer, H. W. ; McMannis, M. J. / High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix : Comparison with a conventional contrast agent. In: Radiology. 1987 ; Vol. 162, No. 1. pp. 9-14.
@article{30731087bbbf496b9d0782476f3868a3,
title = "High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix: Comparison with a conventional contrast agent",
abstract = "A double-blind clinical trial was performed in 60 patients to compare Hexabrix (ioxaglate meglumine and ioxaglate sodium) and Renografin-60 (diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium). Use of Hexabrix produced higher urinary iodine concentrations, lower urine volumes at 30 minutes, and excretory urograms significantly better in diagnostic quality, as rated by four independent observers. There was no difference in nephrogram quality between contrast agents. Patients receiving Hexabrix had less of an increase in heart rate and demonstrated a slight rise in mean arterial blood pressure, rather than the biphasic rise then fall seen with Renografin-60. There was no significant change for up to 96 hours after urography in results of hematology, clinical chemistry, or urinalysis, except for an increase of 0.005 in urine specific gravity with Renografin-60. Patients reported significantly less body heat, heat in the injection arm, and overall discomfort with Hexabrix. There was a similar amount of nausea and vomiting in the two groups. Hexabrix also caused histaminic-type reactions in three patients.",
author = "Spataro, {R. F.} and Katzberg, {Richard W} and Fischer, {H. W.} and McMannis, {M. J.}",
year = "1987",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "162",
pages = "9--14",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - High-dose clinical urography with the low-osmolality contrast agent Hexabrix

T2 - Comparison with a conventional contrast agent

AU - Spataro, R. F.

AU - Katzberg, Richard W

AU - Fischer, H. W.

AU - McMannis, M. J.

PY - 1987

Y1 - 1987

N2 - A double-blind clinical trial was performed in 60 patients to compare Hexabrix (ioxaglate meglumine and ioxaglate sodium) and Renografin-60 (diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium). Use of Hexabrix produced higher urinary iodine concentrations, lower urine volumes at 30 minutes, and excretory urograms significantly better in diagnostic quality, as rated by four independent observers. There was no difference in nephrogram quality between contrast agents. Patients receiving Hexabrix had less of an increase in heart rate and demonstrated a slight rise in mean arterial blood pressure, rather than the biphasic rise then fall seen with Renografin-60. There was no significant change for up to 96 hours after urography in results of hematology, clinical chemistry, or urinalysis, except for an increase of 0.005 in urine specific gravity with Renografin-60. Patients reported significantly less body heat, heat in the injection arm, and overall discomfort with Hexabrix. There was a similar amount of nausea and vomiting in the two groups. Hexabrix also caused histaminic-type reactions in three patients.

AB - A double-blind clinical trial was performed in 60 patients to compare Hexabrix (ioxaglate meglumine and ioxaglate sodium) and Renografin-60 (diatrizoate meglumine and diatrizoate sodium). Use of Hexabrix produced higher urinary iodine concentrations, lower urine volumes at 30 minutes, and excretory urograms significantly better in diagnostic quality, as rated by four independent observers. There was no difference in nephrogram quality between contrast agents. Patients receiving Hexabrix had less of an increase in heart rate and demonstrated a slight rise in mean arterial blood pressure, rather than the biphasic rise then fall seen with Renografin-60. There was no significant change for up to 96 hours after urography in results of hematology, clinical chemistry, or urinalysis, except for an increase of 0.005 in urine specific gravity with Renografin-60. Patients reported significantly less body heat, heat in the injection arm, and overall discomfort with Hexabrix. There was a similar amount of nausea and vomiting in the two groups. Hexabrix also caused histaminic-type reactions in three patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023093682&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023093682&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 3538156

AN - SCOPUS:0023093682

VL - 162

SP - 9

EP - 14

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 1

ER -