Choice of contrast agents for cardiac angiography: review and recommendations based on clinically important distinctions

Abstract

Low osmolal contrast agents (LOCA) are measurably superior to high osmolal contrast agents (HOCA) in a number of properties. However, LOCA are substantially more expensive than HOCA, and universal use of LOCA for cardiac angiography would strain the health care budget. Therefore, the choice to use LOCA in place of HOCA should be based on clinically important differences. Review of available published data suggests that HOCA can be used safely and effectively for cardiac angiography in patients with mild or moderately severe heart disease. When HOCA are used, those that do not bind calcium should be chosen as they cause fewer clinically important adverse reactions than those that do bind calcium. Use of LOCA may offer added safety in high risk patients, although to date, this conclusion has not been proved with clinical experience. Nonionic LOCA may be safer to use than ionic LOCA.