Download PDF
Endoscopy 2000; 32(10): 783-787
DOI: 10.1055/s-2000-7707
Original Article
© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Diagnostic Quality in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Comparison Between Iodixanol and Iopromide

D. F. Martin 1 , R. E. England 1 , T. Rösch 2 , E. Biehl 2 , B. Jeschke 2 , N. Fritz 2 , D. Heldwein 3 , A. Klauser 3 , A. Klaveness 4 , D. Kristoffersen 4
  • 1 Dept. of Radiology, South Manchester University Hospitals, Withington Hospital, Manchester, UK
  • 2 Dept. of Internal Medicine II, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
  • 3 MCHE Klinik, K Innenstadt, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
  • 4 Nycomed Imaging AS, Oslo, Norway
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
31 December 2000 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Background and Study Aims: The contrast medium for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) must produce adequate images, whilst keeping the risk of complications to a minimum. There is a theoretical reason to suppose that a dimeric isosmolar medium may be superior to a monomeric hyperosmolar medium. We have compared two such media in a triple-centre double-blind randomized study on patients referred with a clinical indication for ERCP.

Patients and Methods: A total of 160 patients were randomly allocated to either Iodixanol or Iopromide. Assessments were made of the quality of images and the complications encountered.

Results: A total of 151 patients were evaluated. Apart from a trend towards better diagnostic quality for main pancreatic duct imaging with Iodixanol, there were no differences between the two groups. The overall frequencies of adverse events were similar.

Conclusions: Iodixanol is a safe and effective water-soluble contrast medium for ERCP, comparable to Iopromide, but despite theoretical advantages Iodixanol has no clear practical benefit.

References

  • 1 Liguory C, Lefebvre J F. Retrograde pancreatography: technical tips and spectrum of pathology. Gastrointest Endosc.  Clin N Am. 1995;  5 81-104
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cotton P, Lehman G, Vennes G. Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1991;  37 383-393
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kotz S, Johnson N L, Read C B. Encyclopedia of statistical sciences. Vol. 3. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1983: 642-645
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Pugh N D, Sissons G R, Ruttley M S, . et al . Iodixanol in femoral arteriography (phase III): a comparative double-blind parallel trial between Iodixanol and Iopromide.  Clin Radiol. 1993;  47 96-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cotton P, Williams C. ERCP Diagnostic technique.  In: Practical gastrointestinal endoscopy.  London; Blackwell Science, 1996: 105-138
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Cunliffe W J, Cobden I, Lavelle M I, et al. A randomised prospective study comparing two contrast media in ERCP.  Endoscopy. 1987;  19 201-202
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hannigan B F, Keeling R WN, Slavin B, et al. Hyperamylasemia after ERCP with ionic and nonionic contrast media in ERCP.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1985;  31 (2) 109-110
    PubMedGoogle Scholar

D. F.  Martin,M.D., F.R.C.R., F.R.C.P. 

Dept. of Radiology South Manchester University Hospitals Withington Hospital

Manchester M20 2LR United Kingdom

Fax: Fax:+ 44-161-4481688

Email: E-mail:derrickmartin@hotmail.com