| Abstract: | Ionic and non-ionic contrast media were compared for use in intravenous drip infusion excretory urography. Sixty consecutive cases were classified alternately into two groups, ionic and non-ionic, excluding cases which were known to have factors affecting contrast ability adversely, such as hydronephrosis, renal failure and so on. Each group consisted of 30 cases. A hundred ml of the ionic contrast medium (Diatrizoate--60% Urografin) or non-ionic contrast medium (Iopamidol--Iopamiron 300) was administered I.V. by drip infusion, each infusion taking less than 10 minutes, using a 18 G needle, and 0-minute, 10-minute and 20-minute films were obtained. Visibility of nephrogram, calyceal system, renal pelvis, ureters and bladder were evaluated, ranging from 0 to 3, by six radiologists who were not informed of the contrast medium used. Some detailed factors such as radiographic contrast and fullness of the collecting system and of the bladder were also analyzed. Visualization rate of the ureters was defined as the length of visualized ureters divided by the distance between the renal pelvis and the ureteral orifice of the bladder. There was no significant difference in visualization of nephrogram between the two groups. However, the non-ionic group was superior to the ionic group in visualization of the calyceal system and ureters with statistical significance, probably due to higher radiographic contrast of non-ionic medium. There was no statistical significance between the two groups, in fullness of the calyceal system and visualization rate of the ureters, whereas the ionic group was superior to the non-ionic group in fullness of the bladder.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) |
