Does bicarbonate prevent contrast-induced nephropathy in cardiovascular patients undergoing contrast imaging?

• Published in: Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery 2013-12, Vol.17 (6), p.1028-1035
• Main Authors: Dabare, Dilan, Banihani, Mohammed, Gibbs, Paul, Grewal, Perbinder
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Benchmarking; Best Evidence Topics; Cardiovascular Diseases - diagnostic imaging; Contrast Media - adverse effects; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Fluid Therapy - methods; Humans; Kidney - drug effects; Kidney - physiopathology; Kidney Diseases - chemically induced; Kidney Diseases - diagnosis; Kidney Diseases - physiopathology; Kidney Diseases - prevention & control; Male; Radiography; Risk Factors; Sodium Bicarbonate - therapeutic use; Sodium Chloride - therapeutic use; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1569-9293; 1569-9285
• DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivt390

A best evidence topic in cardiovascular surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether administering sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) prevents contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) in cardiovascular patients undergoing contrast imaging. In total, 266 papers were found using the reported search, 16 of which represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. CIN is thought to occur as a result of ischaemic or oxidative injury to the kidney. It is postulated that NaHCO3attenuates this renal damage by alkanizing renal tubular fluid thus reducing the generation of contrast-induced free radicals, which damage the kidney. Of the 16 trials, 15 recruited patients with various degrees of renal dysfunction at baseline. The benefit of using NaHCO3 was demonstrated at all stages of chronic kidney disease. Apart from four studies, 12 studies used low toxicity, low-osmolar contrast. Merten et al. published the first trial of NaHCO3 vs (saline) NaCl in preventing CIN, demonstrated a significantly lower rate in the NaHCO3 group and advocated its widespread use. Subsequent trials using the same regimen have collaborated these results. However, more recently, Gomes et al. concluded that NaHCO3 is not superior to saline-based hydration. Similarly, Brar et al. randomized 323 patients with moderate-to-severe renal insufficiency to receive either an NaHCO3 or an NaCl infusion and observed no difference in CIN rates. Two studies investigated the effects of rapid urine alkanization with bolus injections of NaHCO3 prior to contrast and found significant reductions in CIN rates compared with NaCl-treated groups. One study observed that NaCl is superior to NaHCO3, while all other studies showed a beneficial effect or no difference between NaCl- and NaHCO3-based hydration. The most recent meta-analysis by Jang et al. incorporated 3609 patients across 19 trials and concluded that NaHCO3-based hydration regimens are superior to NaCl-based ones. Based on this review, the authors recommend NaHCO3 alongside an NaCl hydration regimen. The exact regimen will depend on the context within which contrast is being administered and needs further evaluation.