Brinker Jeffrey
Division of Cardiology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2003;4 Suppl 5:S19-27.
Contrast-enhanced x-ray imaging remains essential to the diagnosis and treatment of many types of cardiac and vascular disease. Despite the rapid advancements in less invasive imaging techniques, only traditional angiography provides a high-resolution, real-time, dynamic view of vascular structures. Cardiologists have become concerned about contrast selection since the introduction of new agents over the last 2 decades. This concern has sparked three sequential debates within our community: the cost effectiveness of low osmolal contrast; whether nonionic agents are prothrombogenic; and whether the potential for nephrotoxicity differs between contrasts. Following is a summary of clinically relevant aspects of the cost effectiveness of low osmolal contrast and the prothrombogenicity of nonionic agents. These issues are important not only to those who perform angiography, but also to those who refer patients to, or follow them after, the procedure.
对比增强X射线成像对于多种类型的心脏和血管疾病的诊断和治疗仍然至关重要。尽管非侵入性成像技术迅速发展,但只有传统血管造影能够提供血管结构的高分辨率、实时动态视图。自过去20年引入新的造影剂以来,心脏病专家一直关注造影剂的选择。这种关注在我们的领域引发了三场连续的辩论:低渗造影剂的成本效益;非离子型造影剂是否具有促血栓形成作用;以及不同造影剂之间肾毒性的可能性是否存在差异。以下是低渗造影剂成本效益和非离子型造影剂促血栓形成性的临床相关方面的总结。这些问题不仅对进行血管造影的人员很重要,对那些将患者转诊或在术后随访患者的人员也很重要。