We have located links that may give you full text access.
Venography with carbon dioxide as a contrast agent.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential role of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a contrast agent for venography.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast agents or with unsatisfactory iodinated contrast studies underwent CO2 digital subtraction venography. The images were rated by three experienced angiographers. Image quality and complications were assessed.
RESULTS: Over a 14-month period, 66 vein segments were studied in 21 patients. There was good correlation between experienced angiographers on CO2 image quality (Ri = 0.80) and good agreement on diagnosis (k = 0.62). In 91% of the vein segments evaluated with C02 there was interobserver agreement on the diagnosis. Upper extremity veins were adequately imaged with CO2 alone in all (6/6) patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast. Following suboptimal iodinated contrast studies in six patients, CO2 produced significantly better quality upper extremity central vein images (p < 0.05). Pain following injection into peripheral veins was the only CO2-related complication. Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were successfully deployed with CO2 alone in 78% (7/9) of patients; two required iodinated contrast.
CONCLUSIONS: Based upon initial experience, CO2 venography can be recommended in patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast or unsatisfactory iodinated contrast studies.
METHODS: Consecutive patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast agents or with unsatisfactory iodinated contrast studies underwent CO2 digital subtraction venography. The images were rated by three experienced angiographers. Image quality and complications were assessed.
RESULTS: Over a 14-month period, 66 vein segments were studied in 21 patients. There was good correlation between experienced angiographers on CO2 image quality (Ri = 0.80) and good agreement on diagnosis (k = 0.62). In 91% of the vein segments evaluated with C02 there was interobserver agreement on the diagnosis. Upper extremity veins were adequately imaged with CO2 alone in all (6/6) patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast. Following suboptimal iodinated contrast studies in six patients, CO2 produced significantly better quality upper extremity central vein images (p < 0.05). Pain following injection into peripheral veins was the only CO2-related complication. Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were successfully deployed with CO2 alone in 78% (7/9) of patients; two required iodinated contrast.
CONCLUSIONS: Based upon initial experience, CO2 venography can be recommended in patients with contraindications to iodinated contrast or unsatisfactory iodinated contrast studies.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app