lomeprol versus iopamidol in tomography of thoracic contrast-enhanced computed and abdominal organs

The aim of this double-blind, parallel-group study was to compare the safety, tolerance, and elficacy ol iomeprol-350 (350 mgl/ml), iomeprol-400 (400 mgl/ml) and iopamidol-37O (370 mgl/ml) for use in contrast-enhanced body computed tomography (CT). Following written informed consent, 120 adult inpatients of either sex requiring CT of thoracic or abdominal organs were randomly assigned to receive iomeprol-350, iomeprol-400 or iopamidol-370. Pre- and post-contrast, all patients underwent clinical, instrumental and laboratory investigation to assess the salety olthe test agents. Tolerance was assessed in terms of discomfort associated with contrast injection. Two experienced radiologists independently and blindly graded the quality ol contrast enhancement obtained with the different contrast solutions by means ola five-point ordinal scale as follows: 1, insufficient;2, sufficient; 3, good; 4, excellent; or E, excessive. Patients in the iomeprol groups needed lewer injections and a smaller volume of contrast medium to obtain examinations of adequate diagnostic quality. Contrast enhancement was judged as excellent or good in about 90% ofthe study examinations, without significant differences between the three study groups. During contrast injection, heat and pain sensations were minimal or absent in most cases. No serious adverse events occurred throughout the study. No significant changes in clinical, instrumental or laboratory safety parameters were observed. In conclusion, iomeprol-4O0 and iomeprol-350 appear to be contrast solutions at least as sale, well tolerated and effective as iopamidol-370 when used as contrast agents lor body CT.