Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende Patientenratgeber
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
European Radiology
Erschienen in:

26.11.2021 | Contrast Media

Continuous use of metformin in patients receiving contrast medium: what is the evidence? A systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Ting-Wan Kao, Kuo-Hua Lee, Wing P. Chan, Kang-Chih Fan, Che-Wei Liu, Yu-Chen Huang

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 5/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

Substantial inconsistencies exist in current guidelines regarding recommendations of metformin usage with the administration of a contrast medium. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis to determine whether the risks of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) and lactic acidosis increase with metformin use in diabetic patients receiving a contrast medium.

Methods

Studies were retrieved from databases from inception to May 15, 2021. Studies that compared the outcomes of using metformin with not using metformin during contrast medium administration were included. The primary outcomes were incidence of CI-AKI and lactic acidosis. The secondary outcomes were renal function changes from baseline. Data analysis was using risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes.

Results

Analyses of two randomized controlled trials and four retrospective cohorts examining a total of 1459 patients revealed no significant differences in the incidence of CI-AKI (RR = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.63) and in changes in renal function measurements (serum creatinine: MD = 0.00 mg/dL, 95% CI, − 0.05 to 0.05; estimated glomerular filtration rate: MD = 0.22, 95% CI, − 2.47 to 2.91) after contrast medium administration between patients using and not using metformin.

Conclusions

There is no evidence that continuing metformin during contrast medium administration is associated with a higher risk of CI-AKI, lactic acidosis, or renal function deterioration compared to patients who discontinued metformin or who were not metformin users. The limited quality of the included studies may compromise the strength of evidence provided in this meta-analysis.

Key Points

  • There is no need to discontinue metformin either before or after intravenous contrast medium exposure in patients with eGFR > 30 mL/min/1.73 m2.
  • In patients receiving intra-arterial contrast medium with first-pass renal exposure, there is no need to withhold metformin if eGFR is above 60 mL/min/1.73 m2.
  • For patients who have an eGFR level between 30 and 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and are receiving intra-arterial contrast medium with first-pass renal exposure, no case of lactic acidosis was observed based on present data, but further evidence is needed to make a strong suggestion regarding its safety.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Viollet B, Guigas B, Sanz Garcia N, Leclerc J, Foretz M, Andreelli F (2012) Cellular and molecular mechanisms of metformin: an overview. Clin Sci (Lond) 122:253–270PubMedCrossRef
2.
Pernicova I, Korbonits M (2014) Metformin–mode of action and clinical implications for diabetes and cancer. Nat Rev Endocrinol 10:143–156PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zhou T, Xu X, Du M, Zhao T, Wang J (2018) A preclinical overview of metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Biomed Pharmacother 106:1227–1235PubMedCrossRef
4.
Graham GG, Punt J, Arora M et al (2011) Clinical pharmacokinetics of metformin. Clin Pharmacokinet 50:81–98PubMedCrossRef
5.
DeFronzo R, Fleming GA, Chen K, Bicsak TA (2016) Metformin-associated lactic acidosis: current perspectives on causes and risk. Metabolism 65:20–29PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Mamoulakis C, Tsarouhas K, Fragkiadoulaki I et al (2017) Contrast-induced nephropathy: basic concepts, pathophysiological implications and prevention strategies. Pharmacol Ther 180:99–112PubMedCrossRef
8.
Hossain MA, Costanzo E, Cosentino J et al (2018) Contrast-induced nephropathy: pathophysiology, risk factors, and prevention. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl 29:1–9PubMedCrossRef
9.
10.
11.
Lalau JD, Race JM (1999) Lactic acidosis in metformin-treated patients. Prognostic value of arterial lactate levels and plasma metformin concentrations. Drug Saf 20:377–384PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
14.
15.
Owen RJ, Hiremath S, Myers A, Fraser-Hill M, Barrett BJ (2014) Canadian Association of Radiologists consensus guidelines for the prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy: update 2012. Can Assoc Radiol J 65:96–105PubMedCrossRef
16.
Liew A, Bavanandan S, Prasad N et al (2020) Asian Pacific Society of Nephrology clinical practice guideline on diabetic kidney disease - an executive summary. Nephrology (Carlton) 25:809–817PubMedCrossRef
17.
Hur KY, Kim MK, Ko SH, Han M, Lee DW, Kwon HS (2020) Metformin treatment for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease: a Korean Diabetes Association and Korean Society of Nephrology consensus statement. Diabetes Metab J 44:3–10PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
Isaka Y, Hayashi H, Aonuma K et al (2020) Guideline on the use of iodinated contrast media in patients with kidney disease 2018. Clin Exp Nephrol 24:1–44PubMedCrossRef
19.
20.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj 372:n71
21.
van der Molen AJ, Reimer P, Dekkers IA et al (2018) Post-contrast acute kidney injury - Part 1: definition, clinical features, incidence, role of contrast medium and risk factors: recommendations for updated ESUR Contrast Medium Safety Committee guidelines. Eur Radiol 28:2845–2855PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Mehta RL, Kellum JA, Shah SV et al (2007) Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury. Crit Care 11:R31PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
24.
Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ et al (2019) Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:Ed000142
25.
Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC et al (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Bmj 343:d5928
26.
Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC et al (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Bmj 355:i4919PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
27.
Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T (2014) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:135PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Follmann D, Elliott P, Suh I, Cutler J (1992) Variance imputation for overviews of clinical trials with continuous response. J Clin Epidemiol 45:769–773PubMedCrossRef
29.
Abrams KR, Gillies CL, Lambert PC (2005) Meta-analysis of heterogeneously reported trials assessing change from baseline. Stat Med 24:3823–3844PubMedCrossRef
30.
Mantel N, Haenszel W (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 22:719–748PubMed
31.
32.
33.
Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 64:383–394PubMedCrossRef
34.
Yu Q, Zhu JJ, Liu WX (2020) Effect of continuous use of metformin on kidney function in diabetes patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 20:187PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
35.
Oktay V, Calpar Çıralı İ, Sinan ÜY, Yıldız A, Ersanlı MK (2017) Impact of continuation of metformin prior to elective coronary angiography on acute contrast nephropathy in patients with normal or mildly impaired renal functions. Anatol J Cardiol 18:334–339PubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Kim SK, Jung J, Jung JH, Kim KY, Baek JH, Hahm JR (2016) The association between use of metformin and change in serum CO2 level after administration of contrast medium. Clin Radiol 71:532–536PubMedCrossRef
37.
Namazi MH, AlipourParsa S, Roohigilani K et al (2018) Is it necessary to discontinue metformin in diabetic patients with GFR > 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 undergoing coronary angiography: a controversy still exists? Acta Biomed 89:227–232PubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Jung J, Cho YY, Jung JH et al (2019) Are patients with mild to moderate renal impairment on metformin or other oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents at increased risk of contrast-induced nephropathy and metabolic acidosis after radiocontrast exposure? Clin Radiol 74:651.e651-651.e656CrossRef
39.
Lal A, Kaur N, Trivedi N (2019) Metformin, arterial contrast and acute kidney injury. Acta Biomed 90:355–356PubMed
40.
Zeller M, Labalette-Bart M, Juliard JM et al (2016) Metformin and contrast-induced acute kidney injury in diabetic patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: a multicenter study. Int J Cardiol 220:137–142PubMedCrossRef
41.
Salpeter SR, Greyber E, Pasternak GA, Salpeter EE (2010) Risk of fatal and nonfatal lactic acidosis with metformin use in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:Cd002967
42.
Goergen SK, Rumbold G, Compton G, Harris C (2010) Systematic review of current guidelines, and their evidence base, on risk of lactic acidosis after administration of contrast medium for patients receiving metformin. Radiology 254:261–269PubMedCrossRef
43.
Prabhu RA, Mareddy AS, Nagaraju SP, Rangaswamy D, Guddattu V (2019) Lactic acidosis due to metformin in type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease stage 3–5: is it significant? Int Urol Nephrol 51:1229–1230PubMedCrossRef
44.
Inzucchi SE, Lipska KJ, Mayo H, Bailey CJ, McGuire DK (2014) Metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes and kidney disease: a systematic review. JAMA 312:2668–2675PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Lee EY, Hwang S, Lee YH et al (2017) Association between metformin use and risk of lactic acidosis or elevated lactate concentration in type 2 diabetes. Yonsei Med J 58:312–318PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Kamber N, Davis WA, Bruce DG, Davis TM (2008) Metformin and lactic acidosis in an Australian community setting: the Fremantle Diabetes Study. Med J Aust 188:446–449PubMedCrossRef
47.
Brown JB, Pedula K, Barzilay J, Herson MK, Latare P (1998) Lactic acidosis rates in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 21:1659–1663PubMedCrossRef
48.
49.
Lazarus B, Wu A, Shin JI et al (2018) Association of metformin use with risk of lactic acidosis across the range of kidney function: a community-based cohort study. JAMA Intern Med 178:903–910PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Posma RA, Lexis CP, Lipsic E et al (2015) Effect of metformin on renal function after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients without diabetes presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: data from the GIPS-III Trial. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 29:451–459PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Misbin RI (2004) The phantom of lactic acidosis due to metformin in patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care 27:1791–1793PubMedCrossRef
52.
Lalau JD, Kajbaf F, Protti A, Christensen MM, De Broe ME, Wiernsperger N (2017) Metformin-associated lactic acidosis (MALA): moving towards a new paradigm. Diabetes Obes Metab 19:1502–1512PubMedCrossRef
53.
Chan NN, Brain HP, Feher MD (1999) Metformin-associated lactic acidosis: a rare or very rare clinical entity? Diabet Med 16:273–281PubMedCrossRef
54.
Bodmer M, Meier C, Krähenbühl S, Jick SS, Meier CR (2008) Metformin, sulfonylureas, or other antidiabetes drugs and the risk of lactic acidosis or hypoglycemia: a nested case-control analysis. Diabetes Care 31:2086–2091PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
55.
Stades AM, Heikens JT, Erkelens DW, Holleman F, Hoekstra JB (2004) Metformin and lactic acidosis: cause or coincidence? A review of case reports. J Intern Med 255:179–187PubMedCrossRef
56.
Lazzeri C, Valente S, Chiostri M, Attanà P, Picariello C, Gensini GF (2012) The prognostic role of in-hospital peak glycemia in stemi patients with and without diabetes. Acta Diabetol 49:379–386PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Continuous use of metformin in patients receiving contrast medium: what is the evidence? A systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von
Ting-Wan Kao
Kuo-Hua Lee
Wing P. Chan
Kang-Chih Fan
Che-Wei Liu
Yu-Chen Huang
Publikationsdatum
26.11.2021
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 5/2022
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08395-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2022

MR elastography in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: inter-center and inter-analysis-method measurement reproducibility and accuracy at 3T

  • Open Access
  • Magnetic Resonance

Clinical impact of a deep learning system for automated detection of missed pulmonary nodules on routine body computed tomography including the chest region

  • Computed Tomography

Validation of an automatic tool for the rapid measurement of brain atrophy and white matter hyperintensity: QyScore®

  • Open Access
  • Magnetic Resonance

Predicting death or recurrence of portal hypertension symptoms after TIPS procedures

  • Gastrointestinal

Utilizing (serial) coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) to predict plaque progression and major adverse cardiac events (MACE): results, merits and challenges

  • Cardiac

Anatomical variation of inner ear may be a predisposing factor for unilateral Ménière’s disease rather than for ipsilateral delayed endolymphatic hydrops

  • Open Access
  • Head and Neck

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

KI-gestütztes Mammografiescreening überzeugt im Praxistest

Mit dem Einsatz künstlicher Intelligenz lässt sich die Detektionsrate im Mammografiescreening offenbar deutlich steigern. Mehr unnötige Zusatzuntersuchungen sind laut der Studie aus Deutschland nicht zu befürchten.

Stumme Schlaganfälle − ein häufiger Nebenbefund im Kopf-CT?

In 4% der in der Notfallambulanz initiierten zerebralen Bildgebung sind „alte“ Schlaganfälle zu erkennen. Gar nicht so selten handelt es sich laut einer aktuellen Studie dabei um unbemerkte Insulte. Bietet sich hier womöglich die Chance auf ein effektives opportunistisches Screening?

Die elektronische Patientenakte kommt: Das sollten Sie jetzt wissen

Am 15. Januar geht die „ePA für alle“ zunächst in den Modellregionen an den Start. Doch schon bald soll sie in allen Praxen zum Einsatz kommen. Was ist jetzt zu tun? Was müssen Sie wissen? Wir geben in einem FAQ Antworten auf 21 Fragen.

Stören weiße Wände und viel Licht die Bildqualitätskontrolle?

Wenn es darum geht, die technische Qualität eines Mammogramms zu beurteilen, könnten graue Wandfarbe und reduzierte Beleuchtung im Bildgebungsraum von Vorteil sein. Darauf deuten zumindest Ergebnisse einer kleinen Studie hin. 

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise