AJR Your Link to CME
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stadalnik, R.
Right arrow Articles by Mason, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stadalnik, R.
Right arrow Articles by Mason, D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 129, Issue 5, 825-830
Copyright © 1977 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

Electrocardiographic response to intravenous urography: prospective evaluation of 275 patients

RC Stadalnik, Z Vera, O DaSilva, R Davies, JF Kraus, and DT Mason

A total of 275 consecutive patients referred for intravenous urography were monitored for electrocardiographic changes during administration of Conray 400 or Renovist II in the form of either intravenous bolus or infusion. Three patients who received Conray (two bolus and one infusion) developed sustained ventricular tachycardia; they reverted to sinus rhythm with intravenous lidocaine. A statistically significant (P less than .05) number of patients developed a heart rate increase of 10 beats/min or more with bolus of either drug (65 of 128) compared to infusion (21 of 147). Depression of ST segment (greater than or equal to 0.5 mm) was encountered statistically more often (P less than .05) with bolus (20 of 128) compared to infusion (six of 147). Increase of corrected QT of 0.10 sec or more was observed more often (P less than .05) with bolus (43 of 128) compared to infusion (five of 147). Abnormal resting ECG, coronary artery disease, or congestive heart failure imposed a higher (P less than .05) risk for development of ventricular tachycardia, ST depression, or ectopic ventricular beats. It is concluded that a bolus injection be very cautiously administered to patients with risk factors such as abnormal ECG, coronary artery disease, or congestive heart failure during intravenous urography and that resuscitative facilities be available.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1977 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.