Clinical intravenous urography: comparative trial of ioxaglate and iopamidol.
A comparative trial of ioxaglate sodium meglumine and iopamidol in excretory urography was undertaken. The study failed to demonstrate any statistically significant differences between the two media in terms of urographic quality. Diagnostically adequate urograms were obtained in 92.6% of patients receiving ioxaglate and 89.6% of patients receiving iopamidol. There were no intermediate, major, or fatal reactions with either media. Minor reactions were slightly more common with ioxaglate. Both media are good, safe urographic agents, and either can be advocated when excretory urography with low-osmolar agents is indicated.[1]References
- Clinical intravenous urography: comparative trial of ioxaglate and iopamidol. Loughran, C.F. Radiology. (1986) [Pubmed]
Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenesOpen Access LicencePrivacy PolicyTerms of Useapsburg
