Contrast induced-acute kidney injury following peripheral angiography with carbon dioxide versus iodinated contrast media: A meta-analysis and systematic review of current literature

Objective

We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) with carbon dioxide (CO₂) versus iodinated contrast media (ICM).

Background

Contrast induced-acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is a known complication following endovascular procedures with ICM. CO₂ has been employed as an alternative imaging medium as it is nontoxic to the kidneys.

Methods

Search of indexed databases was performed and 1,732 references were retrieved. Eight studies (7 observational, 1 Randomized Controlled Trial) formed the meta-analysis. Primary outcome was AKI. Fixed effect model was used when possible in addition to analysis of publication bias.

Results

In this meta-analysis, 677 patients underwent 754 peripheral angiographic procedures. Compared with ICM, CO₂ was associated with a decreased incidence of AKI (4.3% vs. 11.1%; OR 0.465, 95% CI: 0.218-0.992; P = 0.048). Subgroup analysis of four studies that included granular data for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) did not demonstrate a decreased incidence of AKI with CO₂ (4.1% vs. 10.0%; OR 0.449, 95% CI: 0.165–1.221, P = 0.117). Patients undergoing CO₂ angiography experienced a higher number of nonrenal events including limb/abdominal pain (11 vs. 0; P = 0.001) and nausea/vomiting (9 vs. 1; P = 0.006).

Conclusions

In comparison to ICM, CO₂ use is associated with a modestly reduced rate of AKI with more frequent adverse nonrenal events. In studies that use CO₂ as the primary imaging agent, the average incidence of AKI remained high at 6.2%—supporting the concept that factors other than renal toxicity from ICM may contribute to renal impairment following peripheral angiography. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

from #AlexandrosSfakianakis via Alexandros G.Sfakianakis on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2qpaJtb
via IFTTT