Diagnostic Accuracy and Renal Safety of Carbon Dioxide Angiography in Lower Limb Angiography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Mosab Fawzy Mossa Alassal, Thamir Alshamari, Arshia Rezaei, Faisal Muhammad Shaikh
{"title":"Diagnostic Accuracy and Renal Safety of Carbon Dioxide Angiography in Lower Limb Angiography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mosab Fawzy Mossa Alassal, Thamir Alshamari, Arshia Rezaei, Faisal Muhammad Shaikh","doi":"10.3390/diagnostics16203341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Iodinated contrast media (ICM) used in lower limb angiography carry risks of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) and allergic reactions, particularly in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and renal dysfunction. Carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) angiography offers a potential non-nephrotoxic alternative. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and renal safety of CO<sub>2</sub> angiography compared with ICM in patients undergoing lower limb angiography for PAD. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed from inception to 4 September 2025. Studies comparing CO<sub>2</sub> angiography with ICM in adult PAD patients were included. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2 for diagnostic accuracy studies and RoB 2 for randomised trials, and the methodological quality of comparative observational studies with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, adverse events, CIN, contrast volume, serum creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were analysed using random-effects models. <b>Results:</b> Nine studies (527 patients) were included. In three studies (111 patients) with extractable diagnostic accuracy data, CO<sub>2</sub> angiography showed pooled sensitivity of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-0.95) and specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99). Adverse events did not differ significantly between groups (four studies; risk ratio [RR] 0.63, 95% CI: 0.15-2.71), but discomfort during CO<sub>2</sub> injection was common. CIN risk was lower with CO<sub>2</sub> (two studies; RR 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14-0.73; <i>p</i> = 0.007), and contrast volume was reduced by a mean of 80.71 mL (two studies; <i>p</i> < 0.00001). Pooled serum creatinine and eGFR estimates showed extreme heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 98-99%), with the two contributing studies reporting effects in opposite directions. <b>Conclusions:</b> In a small number of comparative studies, CO<sub>2</sub> angiography showed pooled sensitivity and specificity compatible with clinically useful diagnostic performance, although these exploratory estimates derive from three studies with unblinded reference standards. The lower risk of CIN with CO<sub>2</sub>, observed in two studies, is hypothesis-generating, and CO<sub>2</sub> has adverse effects of its own, principally discomfort during injection. These findings should be confirmed in larger prospective trials before CO<sub>2</sub> can be regarded as an established alternative for patients at risk of CIN or iodine allergy.</p>","PeriodicalId":11225,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostics","volume":"16 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13702889/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16203341","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Iodinated contrast media (ICM) used in lower limb angiography carry risks of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) and allergic reactions, particularly in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and renal dysfunction. Carbon dioxide (CO2) angiography offers a potential non-nephrotoxic alternative. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and renal safety of CO2 angiography compared with ICM in patients undergoing lower limb angiography for PAD. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed from inception to 4 September 2025. Studies comparing CO2 angiography with ICM in adult PAD patients were included. Risk of bias was assessed with QUADAS-2 for diagnostic accuracy studies and RoB 2 for randomised trials, and the methodological quality of comparative observational studies with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, adverse events, CIN, contrast volume, serum creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were analysed using random-effects models. Results: Nine studies (527 patients) were included. In three studies (111 patients) with extractable diagnostic accuracy data, CO2 angiography showed pooled sensitivity of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78-0.95) and specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99). Adverse events did not differ significantly between groups (four studies; risk ratio [RR] 0.63, 95% CI: 0.15-2.71), but discomfort during CO2 injection was common. CIN risk was lower with CO2 (two studies; RR 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14-0.73; p = 0.007), and contrast volume was reduced by a mean of 80.71 mL (two studies; p < 0.00001). Pooled serum creatinine and eGFR estimates showed extreme heterogeneity (I2 = 98-99%), with the two contributing studies reporting effects in opposite directions. Conclusions: In a small number of comparative studies, CO2 angiography showed pooled sensitivity and specificity compatible with clinically useful diagnostic performance, although these exploratory estimates derive from three studies with unblinded reference standards. The lower risk of CIN with CO2, observed in two studies, is hypothesis-generating, and CO2 has adverse effects of its own, principally discomfort during injection. These findings should be confirmed in larger prospective trials before CO2 can be regarded as an established alternative for patients at risk of CIN or iodine allergy.

二氧化碳血管造影在下肢血管造影中的诊断准确性和肾脏安全性:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景/目的:用于下肢血管造影的碘造影剂(ICM)存在造影剂肾病(CIN)和过敏反应的风险,特别是对于外周动脉疾病(PAD)和肾功能不全的患者。二氧化碳(CO2)血管造影提供了一种潜在的无肾毒性的替代方法。本研究的目的是评价CO2血管造影与ICM在下肢血管造影诊断PAD患者中的诊断准确性和肾脏安全性。方法:系统检索PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science自成立至2025年9月4日。比较成人PAD患者CO2血管造影与ICM的研究被纳入。诊断准确性研究采用QUADAS-2评估偏倚风险,随机试验采用RoB -2评估偏倚风险,比较观察性研究采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估方法学质量。使用随机效应模型分析合并敏感性、特异性、不良事件、CIN、造影剂体积、血清肌酐和估计肾小球滤过率(eGFR)。结果:纳入9项研究(527例患者)。在三项研究(111例患者)中,可提取诊断准确性数据,CO2血管造影的总敏感性为0.89(95%可信区间[CI]: 0.78-0.95),特异性为0.96 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99)。不良事件组间无显著差异(4项研究,风险比[RR] 0.63, 95% CI: 0.15-2.71),但注射CO2时的不适很常见。CO2降低了CIN的风险(两项研究;RR 0.31, 95% CI: 0.14-0.73; p = 0.007),造影剂体积平均减少80.71 mL(两项研究;p < 0.00001)。合并的血清肌酐和eGFR估计显示出极端的异质性(I2 = 98-99%),两项有贡献的研究报告的影响方向相反。结论:在少数比较研究中,CO2血管造影显示出与临床有用诊断性能相一致的敏感性和特异性,尽管这些探索性估计来自三个具有非盲参考标准的研究。在两项研究中观察到,二氧化碳对CIN的风险较低,这是一种假设,二氧化碳本身也有不良影响,主要是注射时的不适。这些发现应该在更大规模的前瞻性试验中得到证实,然后才能将二氧化碳视为有CIN或碘过敏风险的患者的既定替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Diagnostics
Diagnostics Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
2699
审稿时长
19.64 days
期刊介绍: Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418) is an international scholarly open access journal on medical diagnostics. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications and short notes on the research and development of medical diagnostics. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodological details must be provided for research articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书