Ascending lower limb phlebography: Comparison of ioversol and iothalamate meglumine

A. J. Wilson; W. A. Murphy; J. M. Destouet; L. A. Gilula; D. C. Hardy; B. Monsees; W. G. Totty

Ascending lower limb phlebography: Comparison of ioversol and iothalamate meglumine

A. J. Wilson, W. A. Murphy, J. M. Destouet, L. A. Gilula, D. C. Hardy, B. Monsees, W. G. Totty

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Fifty patients undergoing ascending phlebography of a lower limb were evaluated, in a randomized double-blind fashion, to compare the efficacy, patient tolerance, and safety of two different contrast agents. Ioversol-240 (MP-238), a new nonionic agent, and iothalamate-202 (Conray 43), an established ionic agent, were the contrast agents used. Twenty-five patients were injected with iothalamate and 25 with ioversol. The phlebograms were evaluated for diagnostic quality and the patients for symptoms, with special reference to complaints of heat and pain. No significant difference was demonstrated between the two agents in either examination quality or patient tolerance. No major contrast-related reactions were recorded. We conclude that ioversol-240 appears to be a safe and acceptable alternative to iothalamate-202.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	142-144
Number of pages	3
Journal	Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal
Volume	40
Issue number	3
State	Published - 1989
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{df2087c84c7349ceada799c977083c8c,

title = "Ascending lower limb phlebography: Comparison of ioversol and iothalamate meglumine",

abstract = "Fifty patients undergoing ascending phlebography of a lower limb were evaluated, in a randomized double-blind fashion, to compare the efficacy, patient tolerance, and safety of two different contrast agents. Ioversol-240 (MP-238), a new nonionic agent, and iothalamate-202 (Conray 43), an established ionic agent, were the contrast agents used. Twenty-five patients were injected with iothalamate and 25 with ioversol. The phlebograms were evaluated for diagnostic quality and the patients for symptoms, with special reference to complaints of heat and pain. No significant difference was demonstrated between the two agents in either examination quality or patient tolerance. No major contrast-related reactions were recorded. We conclude that ioversol-240 appears to be a safe and acceptable alternative to iothalamate-202.",

author = "Wilson, {A. J.} and Murphy, {W. A.} and Destouet, {J. M.} and Gilula, {L. A.} and Hardy, {D. C.} and B. Monsees and Totty, {W. G.}",

year = "1989",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "40",

pages = "142--144",

journal = "Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal",

issn = "0008-2902",

publisher = "Canadian Medical Association",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ascending lower limb phlebography

T2 - Comparison of ioversol and iothalamate meglumine

AU - Wilson, A. J.

AU - Murphy, W. A.

AU - Destouet, J. M.

AU - Gilula, L. A.

AU - Hardy, D. C.

AU - Monsees, B.

AU - Totty, W. G.

PY - 1989

Y1 - 1989

N2 - Fifty patients undergoing ascending phlebography of a lower limb were evaluated, in a randomized double-blind fashion, to compare the efficacy, patient tolerance, and safety of two different contrast agents. Ioversol-240 (MP-238), a new nonionic agent, and iothalamate-202 (Conray 43), an established ionic agent, were the contrast agents used. Twenty-five patients were injected with iothalamate and 25 with ioversol. The phlebograms were evaluated for diagnostic quality and the patients for symptoms, with special reference to complaints of heat and pain. No significant difference was demonstrated between the two agents in either examination quality or patient tolerance. No major contrast-related reactions were recorded. We conclude that ioversol-240 appears to be a safe and acceptable alternative to iothalamate-202.

AB - Fifty patients undergoing ascending phlebography of a lower limb were evaluated, in a randomized double-blind fashion, to compare the efficacy, patient tolerance, and safety of two different contrast agents. Ioversol-240 (MP-238), a new nonionic agent, and iothalamate-202 (Conray 43), an established ionic agent, were the contrast agents used. Twenty-five patients were injected with iothalamate and 25 with ioversol. The phlebograms were evaluated for diagnostic quality and the patients for symptoms, with special reference to complaints of heat and pain. No significant difference was demonstrated between the two agents in either examination quality or patient tolerance. No major contrast-related reactions were recorded. We conclude that ioversol-240 appears to be a safe and acceptable alternative to iothalamate-202.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024406838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024406838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2660958

AN - SCOPUS:0024406838

SN - 0008-2902

VL - 40

SP - 142

EP - 144

JO - Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal

JF - Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal

IS - 3

ER -

Ascending lower limb phlebography: Comparison of ioversol and iothalamate meglumine

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this