Contrast induced‐acute kidney injury following peripheral angiography with carbon dioxide versus iodinated contrast media: A meta‐analysis and systematic review of current literature

We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) with carbon dioxide (CO2 ) versus iodinated contrast media (ICM).Contrast induced-acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) is a known complication following endovascular procedures with ICM. CO2 has been employed as an alternative imaging medium as it is nontoxic to the kidneys.Search of indexed databases was performed and 1,732 references were retrieved. Eight studies (7 observational, 1 Randomized Controlled Trial) formed the meta-analysis. Primary outcome was AKI. Fixed effect model was used when possible in addition to analysis of publication bias.In this meta-analysis, 677 patients underwent 754 peripheral angiographic procedures. Compared with ICM, CO2 was associated with a decreased incidence of AKI (4.3% vs. 11.1%; OR 0.465, 95% CI: 0.218-0.992; P = 0.048). Subgroup analysis of four studies that included granular data for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) did not demonstrate a decreased incidence of AKI with CO2 (4.1% vs. 10.0%; OR 0.449, 95% CI: 0.165-1.221, P = 0.117). Patients undergoing CO2 angiography experienced a higher number of nonrenal events including limb/abdominal pain (11 vs. 0; P = 0.001) and nausea/vomiting (9 vs. 1; P = 0.006).In comparison to ICM, CO2 use is associated with a modestly reduced rate of AKI with more frequent adverse nonrenal events. In studies that use CO2 as the primary imaging agent, the average incidence of AKI remained high at 6.2%-supporting the concept that factors other than renal toxicity from ICM may contribute to renal impairment following peripheral angiography. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.