Risk of Contrast-Associated Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Peripheral Angiography with Carbon Dioxide Compared to Iodine-Containing Contrast Agents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the comparative evidence on the risk of contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) with CO(2) or iodinated contrast medium (ICM) for peripheral vascular interventions. We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, Epistemonikos, PubMed-similar-articles, clinical trial registries, journal websites, and reference lists up to February 2022. We included studies comparing the risk of CA-AKI in patients who received CO(2) or ICM for peripheral angiography with or without endovascular intervention. Two reviewers screened the references and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We extracted data on study population, interventions and outcomes. For the risk of CA-AKI as our primary outcome of interest, we calculated risk ratios (RRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) and performed random-effects meta-analyses. We identified three RCTs and five cohort studies that fully met our eligibility criteria. Based on a random-effects meta-analysis, the risk of CA-AKI was lower with CO(2) compared to ICM (8.6% vs. 15.2%; RR, 0.59; 95% CI 0.33–1.04). Only limited results from a few studies were available on procedure and fluoroscopy time, radiation dose and CO(2)-related adverse events. The evidence suggests that the use of CO(2) for peripheral vascular interventions reduces the risk of CA-AKI compared to ICM. However, due to the relevant residual risk of CA-AKI with the use of CO(2), other AKI risk factors must be considered in patients undergoing peripheral vascular interventions.