Cargando…

Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial

OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate non-inferiority of iobitridol 350 for coronary CT angiography (CTA) compared to higher iodine content contrast media regarding rate of patients evaluable for the presence of coronary artery stenoses. METHODS: In this multicentre trial, 452 patients were randomized to recei...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Achenbach, Stephan, Paul, Jean-François, Laurent, François, Becker, Hans-Christoph, Rengo, Marco, Caudron, Jerome, Leschka, Sebastian, Vignaux, Olivier, Knobloch, Gesine, Benea, Giorgio, Schlosser, Thomas, Andreu, Jordi, Cabeza, Beatriz, Jacquier, Alexis, Souto, Miguel, Revel, Didier, Qanadli, Salah Dine, Cademartiri, Filippo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5209424/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27271922
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4437-9
_version_ 1782490739706429440
author Achenbach, Stephan
Paul, Jean-François
Laurent, François
Becker, Hans-Christoph
Rengo, Marco
Caudron, Jerome
Leschka, Sebastian
Vignaux, Olivier
Knobloch, Gesine
Benea, Giorgio
Schlosser, Thomas
Andreu, Jordi
Cabeza, Beatriz
Jacquier, Alexis
Souto, Miguel
Revel, Didier
Qanadli, Salah Dine
Cademartiri, Filippo
author_facet Achenbach, Stephan
Paul, Jean-François
Laurent, François
Becker, Hans-Christoph
Rengo, Marco
Caudron, Jerome
Leschka, Sebastian
Vignaux, Olivier
Knobloch, Gesine
Benea, Giorgio
Schlosser, Thomas
Andreu, Jordi
Cabeza, Beatriz
Jacquier, Alexis
Souto, Miguel
Revel, Didier
Qanadli, Salah Dine
Cademartiri, Filippo
author_sort Achenbach, Stephan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate non-inferiority of iobitridol 350 for coronary CT angiography (CTA) compared to higher iodine content contrast media regarding rate of patients evaluable for the presence of coronary artery stenoses. METHODS: In this multicentre trial, 452 patients were randomized to receive iobitridol 350, iopromide 370 or iomeprol 400 and underwent coronary CTA using CT systems with 64-detector rows or more. Two core lab readers assessed 18 coronary segments per patient regarding image quality (score 0 = non diagnostic to 4 = excellent quality), vascular attenuation, signal and contrast to noise ratio (SNR, CNR). Patients were considered evaluable if no segment had a score of 0. RESULTS: Per-patient, the rate of fully evaluable CT scans was 92.1, 95.4 and 94.6 % for iobitridol, iopromide and iomeprol, respectively. Non-inferiority of iobitridol over the best comparator was demonstrated with a 95 % CI of the difference of [-8.8 to 2.1], with a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -10 %. Although average attenuation increased with higher iodine concentrations, average SNR and CNR did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: With current CT technology, iobitridol 350 mg iodine/ml is not inferior to contrast media with higher iodine concentrations in terms of image quality for coronary stenosis assessment. KEY POINTS: • Iodine concentration is an important parameter for image quality in coronary CTA. • Contrast enhancement must be balanced against the amount of iodine injected. • Iobitridol 350 is non-inferior compared to CM with higher iodine concentrations. • Higher attenuation with higher iodine concentrations, but no SNR or CNR differences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5209424
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52094242017-01-18 Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial Achenbach, Stephan Paul, Jean-François Laurent, François Becker, Hans-Christoph Rengo, Marco Caudron, Jerome Leschka, Sebastian Vignaux, Olivier Knobloch, Gesine Benea, Giorgio Schlosser, Thomas Andreu, Jordi Cabeza, Beatriz Jacquier, Alexis Souto, Miguel Revel, Didier Qanadli, Salah Dine Cademartiri, Filippo Eur Radiol Contrast Media OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate non-inferiority of iobitridol 350 for coronary CT angiography (CTA) compared to higher iodine content contrast media regarding rate of patients evaluable for the presence of coronary artery stenoses. METHODS: In this multicentre trial, 452 patients were randomized to receive iobitridol 350, iopromide 370 or iomeprol 400 and underwent coronary CTA using CT systems with 64-detector rows or more. Two core lab readers assessed 18 coronary segments per patient regarding image quality (score 0 = non diagnostic to 4 = excellent quality), vascular attenuation, signal and contrast to noise ratio (SNR, CNR). Patients were considered evaluable if no segment had a score of 0. RESULTS: Per-patient, the rate of fully evaluable CT scans was 92.1, 95.4 and 94.6 % for iobitridol, iopromide and iomeprol, respectively. Non-inferiority of iobitridol over the best comparator was demonstrated with a 95 % CI of the difference of [-8.8 to 2.1], with a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -10 %. Although average attenuation increased with higher iodine concentrations, average SNR and CNR did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: With current CT technology, iobitridol 350 mg iodine/ml is not inferior to contrast media with higher iodine concentrations in terms of image quality for coronary stenosis assessment. KEY POINTS: • Iodine concentration is an important parameter for image quality in coronary CTA. • Contrast enhancement must be balanced against the amount of iodine injected. • Iobitridol 350 is non-inferior compared to CM with higher iodine concentrations. • Higher attenuation with higher iodine concentrations, but no SNR or CNR differences. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-06-07 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5209424/ /pubmed/27271922 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4437-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Contrast Media
Achenbach, Stephan
Paul, Jean-François
Laurent, François
Becker, Hans-Christoph
Rengo, Marco
Caudron, Jerome
Leschka, Sebastian
Vignaux, Olivier
Knobloch, Gesine
Benea, Giorgio
Schlosser, Thomas
Andreu, Jordi
Cabeza, Beatriz
Jacquier, Alexis
Souto, Miguel
Revel, Didier
Qanadli, Salah Dine
Cademartiri, Filippo
Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial
title Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial
title_full Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial
title_fullStr Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial
title_short Comparative assessment of image quality for coronary CT angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. A multicentre randomized double-blind trial
title_sort comparative assessment of image quality for coronary ct angiography with iobitridol and two contrast agents with higher iodine concentrations: iopromide and iomeprol. a multicentre randomized double-blind trial
topic Contrast Media
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5209424/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27271922
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4437-9
work_keys_str_mv AT achenbachstephan comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT pauljeanfrancois comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT laurentfrancois comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT beckerhanschristoph comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT rengomarco comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT caudronjerome comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT leschkasebastian comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT vignauxolivier comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT knoblochgesine comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT beneagiorgio comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT schlosserthomas comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT andreujordi comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT cabezabeatriz comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT jacquieralexis comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT soutomiguel comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT reveldidier comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT qanadlisalahdine comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT cademartirifilippo comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial
AT comparativeassessmentofimagequalityforcoronaryctangiographywithiobitridolandtwocontrastagentswithhigheriodineconcentrationsiopromideandiomeprolamulticentrerandomizeddoubleblindtrial