Discomfort assessment in peripheral angiography: randomized clinical trial of Iodixanol 270 versus Ioversol 320 in diabetics with critical limb ischemia.

Palena, Luis Mariano; Sacco, Zeno Dal; Brigato, Cesare; Sultato, Enrico; Barra, Domenico; Candeo, Alessandro; Manzi, Marco

OBJECTIVES To assess and compare the intra-arterial injection-associated discomfort of iodinated contrast media (CM) and the impact on diagnostic efficacy in diabetics with critical limb ischemia (CLI). BACKGROUND Arterial revascularization is a mainstay in patients with CLI. Previous diagnostic angiography is a crucial step that can be affected by CM injection discomfort compromising the revascularization results, and it could vary related to the CM agents. METHODS One hundred forty-eight patients received Iodixanol 270 mg iodine pro ml or Ioversol 320 mg iodine pro ml in a prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial. Injection-associated discomfort was assessed by Visual Analogic Scale (VAS). Diagnostic efficacy and safety up to 1 week were evaluated. RESULTS The incidence of pain has been around 50% of the all population in study, with lesser incidence of pain (25.7% vs 74.3%; P < 0.0001) and of heat sensation (55.4% vs 85.1%; P < 0.0001), after Iodixanol than after Ioversol injection. Discomfort mean score, according to VAS assessment, was less in the Iodixanol group (8.1 ± 15.3) than in the Ioversol group (36.0 ± 29.7), after first injection (P < 0.001) and for all injections (P < 0.001). A significant difference was also observed in favor of Iodixanol (P < 0.001), respect to mean score of discomfort and heat sensation, assessed by the operators after all the CM injections. CONCLUSIONS Iodixanol caused less frequent and severe discomfort, characterized as pain and heat during intra-arterial administration compared with Ioversol. The pain severity is tightly related to image and diagnosis quality with an impact on the patients for additional injections and larger CM volumes.