是时候给肾毒性的争论注入一些对比了。

IF 3 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Kidney360 Pub Date : 2025-10-02 DOI:10.34067/KID.0000001019
Nans Florens, Julien Demiselle
{"title":"是时候给肾毒性的争论注入一些对比了。","authors":"Nans Florens, Julien Demiselle","doi":"10.34067/KID.0000001019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Iodinated contrast media have long been feared for causing \"contrast-induced AKI\" (CI-AKI), a concern rooted in early reports with high-osmolar agents. Experimental data suggest potential nephrotoxic mechanisms, yet clinical evidence from older uncontrolled studies was confounded by comorbidities and procedural risks. Contemporary propensity-matched and controlled analyses consistently show that modern low- and iso-osmolar contrast agents (mostly intravenously administered) uncommonly cause true nephrotoxicity, even among high-risk populations such as patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, acute kidney injury, or critical illness. Large randomized trials, including PRESERVE, found no difference in outcomes between sodium bicarbonate and isotonic saline hydration as preventive strategies, nor N-acetylcysteine administration, and highlighted risks like fluid overload. Persistent fear of CI-AKI has fueled \"renalism\": unnecessary avoidance or delay of essential imaging, leading to worse outcomes. Current consensus emphasizes individualized care-avoiding hypovolemia, limiting contrast dose, and withholding nephrotoxins only in severe kidney impairment. A balanced, evidence-based approach should replace outdated caution.</p>","PeriodicalId":17882,"journal":{"name":"Kidney360","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Time to Inject Some Contrast into the Nephrotoxicity Debate.\",\"authors\":\"Nans Florens, Julien Demiselle\",\"doi\":\"10.34067/KID.0000001019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Iodinated contrast media have long been feared for causing \\\"contrast-induced AKI\\\" (CI-AKI), a concern rooted in early reports with high-osmolar agents. Experimental data suggest potential nephrotoxic mechanisms, yet clinical evidence from older uncontrolled studies was confounded by comorbidities and procedural risks. Contemporary propensity-matched and controlled analyses consistently show that modern low- and iso-osmolar contrast agents (mostly intravenously administered) uncommonly cause true nephrotoxicity, even among high-risk populations such as patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, acute kidney injury, or critical illness. Large randomized trials, including PRESERVE, found no difference in outcomes between sodium bicarbonate and isotonic saline hydration as preventive strategies, nor N-acetylcysteine administration, and highlighted risks like fluid overload. Persistent fear of CI-AKI has fueled \\\"renalism\\\": unnecessary avoidance or delay of essential imaging, leading to worse outcomes. Current consensus emphasizes individualized care-avoiding hypovolemia, limiting contrast dose, and withholding nephrotoxins only in severe kidney impairment. A balanced, evidence-based approach should replace outdated caution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17882,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney360\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney360\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34067/KID.0000001019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney360","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34067/KID.0000001019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,人们一直担心碘造影剂会引起“造影剂诱发的AKI”(CI-AKI),这种担忧源于早期关于高渗透性造影剂的报道。实验数据提示潜在的肾毒性机制,但来自较早的非对照研究的临床证据与合并症和手术风险相混淆。当代倾向匹配和对照分析一致表明,现代低渗透压和等渗透压造影剂(主要是静脉给药)很少引起真正的肾毒性,即使在高风险人群中,如晚期慢性肾病、急性肾损伤或危重疾病患者中也是如此。包括PRESERVE在内的大型随机试验发现,碳酸氢钠和等渗盐水水化作为预防策略的结果没有差异,n -乙酰半胱氨酸也没有,并强调了液体过载等风险。对CI-AKI的持续恐惧助长了“逃避主义”:不必要地回避或延迟必要的成像,导致更糟糕的结果。目前的共识强调个体化护理-避免低血容量,限制造影剂剂量,仅在严重肾损害时才使用肾毒素。一种平衡的、基于证据的方法应该取代过时的谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Time to Inject Some Contrast into the Nephrotoxicity Debate.

Iodinated contrast media have long been feared for causing "contrast-induced AKI" (CI-AKI), a concern rooted in early reports with high-osmolar agents. Experimental data suggest potential nephrotoxic mechanisms, yet clinical evidence from older uncontrolled studies was confounded by comorbidities and procedural risks. Contemporary propensity-matched and controlled analyses consistently show that modern low- and iso-osmolar contrast agents (mostly intravenously administered) uncommonly cause true nephrotoxicity, even among high-risk populations such as patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, acute kidney injury, or critical illness. Large randomized trials, including PRESERVE, found no difference in outcomes between sodium bicarbonate and isotonic saline hydration as preventive strategies, nor N-acetylcysteine administration, and highlighted risks like fluid overload. Persistent fear of CI-AKI has fueled "renalism": unnecessary avoidance or delay of essential imaging, leading to worse outcomes. Current consensus emphasizes individualized care-avoiding hypovolemia, limiting contrast dose, and withholding nephrotoxins only in severe kidney impairment. A balanced, evidence-based approach should replace outdated caution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Kidney360
Kidney360 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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