Cargando…
A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures
BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the decrease in contrast media volume (CMV) with ultra-low contrast delivery technique (ULCD) developed at our institution versus the usual automated contrast injector system (ACIS) contrast delivery in coronary procedures. METHODS: We analyzed the amount of contrast g...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6890984/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31779856 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2019.09.001 |
_version_ | 1783475733082931200 |
---|---|
author | Stys, Adam Gedela, Maheedhar Bhatnagar, Udit Petrasko, Marian Dawoud, Hazem Malinski, Tadeusz Stys, Tomasz |
author_facet | Stys, Adam Gedela, Maheedhar Bhatnagar, Udit Petrasko, Marian Dawoud, Hazem Malinski, Tadeusz Stys, Tomasz |
author_sort | Stys, Adam |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the decrease in contrast media volume (CMV) with ultra-low contrast delivery technique (ULCD) developed at our institution versus the usual automated contrast injector system (ACIS) contrast delivery in coronary procedures. METHODS: We analyzed the amount of contrast given in the consecutive 204 patients of the operators who use ULCD technique versus consecutive 200 patients of the other operators who use ACIS without ULCD technique for coronary angiograms and/or percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) from May 2017 to July 2018 at our center. We calculated the mean CMV between these groups. RESULTS: We observed a significant reduction in mean CMV with ULCD technique versus standard ACIS, respectively: angiogram 24.8 ± 15.8 mL (n = 194) vs 42.3 ± 25.1 mL (n = 200) (p < 0.0001); PCI 23.5 ± 19.7 mL (n = 52) vs 48.2 ± 30.8 mL (n = 16) (p < 0.0070); angiogram with ad hoc PCI 53.4 ± 32.1 mL (n = 23) vs 89.7 ± 35.6 mL (n = 16) (p < 0.0024); and overall angiogram and PCI 27.4 ± 20.5 mL (n = 204) vs 44.9 ± 28.0 mL (n = 181) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our study showed a highly significant reduction in CMV using ULCD technique compared to standard ACIS contrast delivery in coronary invasive procedures. Even in the standard ACIS arm, CMV was significantly lower than values reported in literature, possibly due to operators' bias toward contrast preservation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6890984 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68909842020-07-01 A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures Stys, Adam Gedela, Maheedhar Bhatnagar, Udit Petrasko, Marian Dawoud, Hazem Malinski, Tadeusz Stys, Tomasz Indian Heart J Original Article BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the decrease in contrast media volume (CMV) with ultra-low contrast delivery technique (ULCD) developed at our institution versus the usual automated contrast injector system (ACIS) contrast delivery in coronary procedures. METHODS: We analyzed the amount of contrast given in the consecutive 204 patients of the operators who use ULCD technique versus consecutive 200 patients of the other operators who use ACIS without ULCD technique for coronary angiograms and/or percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) from May 2017 to July 2018 at our center. We calculated the mean CMV between these groups. RESULTS: We observed a significant reduction in mean CMV with ULCD technique versus standard ACIS, respectively: angiogram 24.8 ± 15.8 mL (n = 194) vs 42.3 ± 25.1 mL (n = 200) (p < 0.0001); PCI 23.5 ± 19.7 mL (n = 52) vs 48.2 ± 30.8 mL (n = 16) (p < 0.0070); angiogram with ad hoc PCI 53.4 ± 32.1 mL (n = 23) vs 89.7 ± 35.6 mL (n = 16) (p < 0.0024); and overall angiogram and PCI 27.4 ± 20.5 mL (n = 204) vs 44.9 ± 28.0 mL (n = 181) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our study showed a highly significant reduction in CMV using ULCD technique compared to standard ACIS contrast delivery in coronary invasive procedures. Even in the standard ACIS arm, CMV was significantly lower than values reported in literature, possibly due to operators' bias toward contrast preservation. Elsevier 2019 2019-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6890984/ /pubmed/31779856 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2019.09.001 Text en © 2019 Cardiological Society of India. Published by Elsevier B.V. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Stys, Adam Gedela, Maheedhar Bhatnagar, Udit Petrasko, Marian Dawoud, Hazem Malinski, Tadeusz Stys, Tomasz A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
title | A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
title_full | A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
title_fullStr | A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
title_full_unstemmed | A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
title_short | A prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
title_sort | prospective study of contrast preservation using ultra-low contrast delivery technique versus standard automated contrast injector system in coronary procedures |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6890984/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31779856 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2019.09.001 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stysadam aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT gedelamaheedhar aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT bhatnagarudit aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT petraskomarian aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT dawoudhazem aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT malinskitadeusz aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT stystomasz aprospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT stysadam prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT gedelamaheedhar prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT bhatnagarudit prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT petraskomarian prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT dawoudhazem prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT malinskitadeusz prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures AT stystomasz prospectivestudyofcontrastpreservationusingultralowcontrastdeliverytechniqueversusstandardautomatedcontrastinjectorsystemincoronaryprocedures |