Comparison of Safety and Diagnostic Efficacy of Iohexol 240 mgI/mL, Iopamidol 250 mgI/mL, and Iodixanol 270 mgI/mL in Cerebral Angiography: A Prospective, Multicenter Study.

PURPOSE

This multicenter prospective study aimed to evaluate the quality and diagnostic effectiveness of cerebral angiography images obtained using low-concentration iodinated contrast agents (iohexol 240 mgI/mL, iopamidol 250 mgI/mL, and iodixanol 270 mgI/mL) and to assess the safety thereof. The study addresses the need for safer contrast agent alternatives without compromising the diagnostic quality of identifying cerebrovascular disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Conducted in 5 medical centers in South Korea, we enrolled patients aged 19 years or older who were referred for diagnostic cerebral angiography under non-emergency conditions, excluding those with specific health conditions and sensitivities. The study design included a prospective, observational approach with a 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for sample size calculation, aiming for a total sample of 231 participants for adequate power. Image quality was evaluated using a 4-level scale by 2 independent, blinded radiologists, and adverse reactions were monitored both immediately and up to 7 days post-procedure. Statistical analysis involved 1-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests to assess the image quality and safety profiles of the contrast agents.

RESULTS

Among 266 patients screened, 243 were included in the final analysis. The evaluation revealed no statistically significant differences in image quality among the 3 types of low-concentration contrast agents. Adverse events were observed in 28.8% of patients, with 27.2% experiencing acute reactions, primarily mild reactions, and 3.3% experiencing delayed reactions. The overall safety profile showed no significant changes in vital signs or electrocardiogram readings before and after contrast agent injection.

CONCLUSION

Using low-concentration iodinated contrast agents for cerebral angiography provides image quality comparable to that of conventional high-concentration agents, with no significant increase in adverse events, suggesting a safer alternative for patients.