Indian Journal of Nephrology Home 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
[View FULLTEXT] [Download PDF]
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 30  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 403--408

Comparison of oral and intravenous N-acetyl cysteine in preventing contrast nephropathy

Mohammad Reza Khatami1, Nasrin Nikravan1, Mojtaba Salarifar2, Hamid Reza Poorhosseini2, Saeid Sadeghian2, Ali Mohammad Haj-Zeinali2, Hassan Aghajani2 
1 Nephrology Research Center, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Keshavarz Blvd, Tehran, Iran
2 Tehran Herat Center, North Karegar Ave, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Prof. Mohammad Reza Khatami
Nephrology Research Center, Imam Khomeini hospital, Keshavarz Blvd, Tehran
Iran

Introduction: Despite high rates of morbidity and mortality in patients with contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), there is no consensus regarding prevention of this well-known complication of contrast media use. One agent that has been widely used in this regard is N-acetyl cysteine (NAC). Nevertheless, its efficacy is still controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of NAC, both in the oral and intravenous forms, for the prevention of CIN. Methods: This study is a double-blind randomized placebo controlled clinical trial. We randomized 434 adult patients with chronic kidney disease (constant serum creatinine ≥1.5 mg/dL) who were candidates for coronary angiography/plasty. The patients were categorized into three groups. One group received 1,200 mg NAC intravenously half an hour before the procedure and oral placebo starting 3 days before angiography. The second group received oral NAC 600 mg twice daily for 3 days, starting the day before the intervention and intravenous placebo half an hour before intervention. The third group received both oral and intravenous placebo. CIN was defined as a 25% relative increase in serum creatinine from baseline value, 48 h after use of contrast medium. Results: Of the 434 patients, 149 received intravenous NAC, 145 received oral NAC, and the remaining 140 received placebo. The incidence of CIN in the three groups was 6.1%, 7.6%, and 10.8%, respectively (p = 0.34). Conclusion: In patients with chronic kidney disease, neither intravenous nor oral NAC is superior to placebo for preventing CIN.

How to cite this article:
Khatami MR, Nikravan N, Salarifar M, Poorhosseini HR, Sadeghian S, Haj-Zeinali AM, Aghajani H. Comparison of oral and intravenous N-acetyl cysteine in preventing contrast nephropathy.Indian J Nephrol 2020;30:403-408

How to cite this URL:
Khatami MR, Nikravan N, Salarifar M, Poorhosseini HR, Sadeghian S, Haj-Zeinali AM, Aghajani H. Comparison of oral and intravenous N-acetyl cysteine in preventing contrast nephropathy. Indian J Nephrol [serial online] 2020 [cited 2021 Oct 27 ];30:403-408
Available from: https://www.indianjnephrol.org/article.asp?issn=0971-4065;year=2020;volume=30;issue=6;spage=403;epage=408;aulast=Khatami;type=0