Contrast-induced Nephropathy - Update and Practical Clinical Applications

Contrast-induced Nephropathy - Update and Practical Clinical Applications

US Cardiovascular Disease 2006
Published: December 2006
dots

Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) represents an increasing healthcare burden and challenge as the frequency of diagnostic imaging and interventional studies increase, particularly among populations at risk of developing CIN. As the population ages, decreased renal function and increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease become more prevalent. Increasing levels of obesity with resultant metabolic syndrome and/or adult diabetes mellitus also increases the population at risk for CIN.

CIN is the third most common cause of hospital acquired acute renal failure. Recently, important clinical trials on CIN have been completed. Today, there is more agreement on the definition of CIN and a better understanding of which patients are at increased risk of developing CIN. Also, new insights into the pathogenesis of the renal injury are leading to innovative pharmacologic strategies.

Definition and Clinical Implications of CIN
For clinical and research purposes CIN is defined as an acute decline in renal function (rise in serum creatinine by 25% or greater than 0.5mg/dL from baseline or fall in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) by greater than 25%) after systemic contrast administration in the absence of other causes.1 Typically, CIN onset occurs within 24–48 hours of exposure, serum creatinine levels peak in 3–5 days, and renal function returns to baseline in 7–21 days. If renal function does not return to baseline, other possible causes of renal injury like atheroembolism should be suspected.1 The incidence of CIN is less than 5% in patients with normal renal function and 15–50% in patients with baseline renal dysfunction (creatinine clearance less than 60mL/min).1 The incidence of dialysis-dependent acute tubular necrosis is 1.3 to 19%. CIN is an indicator of marked increase in short-term and late mortality. Acute renal failure after coronary intervention is associated with a 36% in-hospital mortality rate and a 19% two-year survival rate.2-4

Pathogenesis of CIN
The pathogenesis of CIN is complex, with a cascade of contributing factors that are not fully understood.5 After injection of contrast media, renal blood flow increases transiently, followed by a more prolonged decrease, particularly at the corticomedullary junction of the kidney. The outer medulla is particularly susceptible to ischemic injury because of its high metabolic activity and low prevailing oxygen tension. Associated with the decrease in renal blood flow there is a decrease in glomerular filtration rate due to afferent renal arteriolar vasoconstriction which is calcium dependent with increased intrarenal adenosine and increased endothelium-1 activity as likely mediators of the vasoconstriction. The risk of CIN increases if there are inadequate compensatory vaso-dilatory responses such as prostaglandins (E2 and I2) and nitric oxide.

Renal tubular cellular injury at least in part is mediated by generation of oxygen-free radicals. Intrarenal adenosine accumulates due to the depletion of adenosine triphosphate as a consequence of proximal tubular stress due to osmotic load and the large size of CM molecules.The renal toxicity from the direct effects of CM is reversible, as has been shown in vitro in studies in which renal tubular cells responded to CM exposure by increasing the concentrations of extracellular adenosine and by decreasing the activity of mitrochondrial enzymes without altering viability.6 A late effect of intrarenal adenosine is oxygen free radical production due to the catabolism of intrarenal adenosine to xanthine.7

A role for intrarenal adenosine as a renal vasoconstrictor and substrate for oxygen-free radical formation is supported in human studies. Adenosine increases in urine following CM; the magnitude of adenosine release and depression of creatinine clearance is proportional to the osmolatity of the contrast agent, essentially a dose response relation.8 Further, an inhibitor of adenosine uptake, dipyridamole, exacerbates the fall in GFR after CM.

References:
  1. Solomon R,“Contrast-medium-induced acute renal failure”, Kidney Int (1998);53: pp. 230–242.
  2. Rihal CS,Textor SC, Grill DE, et al., “Incidence and prognostic importance of acute renal failure after percutaneous coronary intervention”, Circulation (2002);105: pp. 2259–2264.
  3. Gruberg L, Mintz GS, Megran R, et al., “The prognostic implications of further renal function deterioration within 48 hours of interventional coronary procedures in patients with pre-existent chronic renal insufficiency”, J Am Coll Cardiol (2000);36: pp. 1542–1548.
  4. McCullough PA,Wolyn R, Rocher LL, et al., “Acute renal failure after coronary intervention: incidence, risk factors and relationship to mortality”, Am J Med (1997);103: pp. 368–375.
  5. Tumlin J, Stacul F, Adam A, et al., “Pathophysiology of contrast-induced nephropathy”, Am J Cardiol (2006);98(suppl): pp. 14K–20K.
  6. Hardiek K, Katholi RE, Ramkumar V, et al., “Proximal tubule cell response to radiographic contrast media”, Am J Physiol (2001);280: pp. F61–F70.
  7. Katholi RE,Woods WT,Taylor GJ, et al., “Oxygen free radicals and contrast nephropathy”, Am J Kidney Dis (1998);32: pp. 64–71.
  8. Katholi RE,Taylor GJ, McCann WP, et al., “Nephrotoxicity from contrast media: attenuation with theophylline”, Radiology (1995);195: pp. 17–22.
  9. Fujisaki K, Kubo M, Maduda K, et al., “Infusion of radiocontrast agents induces exaggerated release of urinary endothelin in patients with impaired renal function”, Clinical Exp Nephrol (2003);7: pp. 279–283.
  10. Clark BX, Kim D, Epstein FH, “Endothelin and atrial natriuretic peptide levels following radiocontrast exposure in humans”, Am J Kidney Dis (l997);30: pp. 82–86.
  11. Pflueger A, Larson TS, Nath KA, et al., “Role of adenosine in contrast media-induced acute renal failure in diabetes mellitus”, Mayo Clin Proc (2000);75: pp. 1275–1283.
  12. Komers R, Anderson S,“Paradoxes of nitric oxide in the diabetic kidney”, Am J Physiol (2003);284: pp. 1121–1137.
  13. Hardiek J, Katholi RE, Robbs RS, et al., “Renal effects of contrast media in diabetic patients undergoing diagnostic or interventional coronary angiography”, J Diabetes Compl (2006);in press: pp. 1–7.
  14. McCullough PA, Adam A, Becker CR, et al., “Risk prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy”, Am J Cardiol (2006);98 (Suppl): pp. 27K–36K.
  15. Russo D,Testa A, Della V, et al., “Randomized prospective study on renal effects of two different contrast media in humans: protective role of a calcium channel blocker”, Nephron (1990);55: pp. 254–257.
  16. Khanal S, Attallah N, Smith DE, et al., “Statin therapy reduces contrast-induced nephropathy: an analysis of contemporary percutaneous interventions”, Am J Med (2005);118: pp. 843–849.
  17. Stacul F, Adam A, Becker CR, et al., “Strategies to reduce the risk of contrast-induced nephropathy”, Am J Cardiol (2006);98(suppl);59: pp. 59K–77K.
  18. Taliercio CP,Vlietstra RE, Istrup DM, et al.,“Randomized comparison of the nephrotoxicity iopamidol and diatrizoate in high risk patients undergoing cardiac angiography”, J Am Coll Cardiol (1991);17: pp. 384–390.
  19. Rudnick MR, Goldfarb S,Wexler L, et al., “Nephrotoxicity of ionic and nonionic contrast media 1,196 patients: a randomized trial,The Iohex Cooperative Study,” Kidney Int (1995);47: pp. 254–261.
  20. Aspelin P, Aubry P, Fransson SG, et al., Nephric Studies Investigators. “Nephrotoxic effects in high risk patients undergoing angiography”, N Engl J Med (2003);348: pp. 491–499.
  21. Barrett BJ, Katzberg RW,Thomsen HK, et al.“Contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing computed tomography: a double-blind comparison of iodixanol and iopamidol”, Invest Radiology (2006);41, pp. 815–821.
  22. Solomon RJ, Natarajan MK, Doucet S, et al., “The CARE (Cardiac Angiography in REnally impaired patients Study: A randomized, double-blind trial of contrast-induced nephropathy in high-risk patients”, Presented at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics Meeting (2006).
  23. Solomon R,“The role of osmolality in the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy: A systematic review of angiographic contrast media in high-risk patients”, Kidney Int (2005);68: pp. 2256–2263.
  24. Merten GJ, Burgess WP, Gray LV, et al., “Prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy with sodium bicarbonate”, J Am Med Assoc (2004);241: pp. 2328–2334.
  25. Spargias K, Alexopoulos E, Kyrzopoulos S, et al., “Ascorbic acid prevents contrast mediated nephropathy in patients with renal dysfunction undergoing angiography or intervention”, Circulation (2004);110: pp. 2837–2842.

Copyright® 2010 Business Briefings, Ltd. All rights reserved.
Touch Cardiology is for informational purposes and should not be considered medical advice, diagnosis or treatment recommendations.