Effect of Intravenous Pyelogram on Vital Parameters: A Study Focusing on Complications

Full Article - PDF

Published: 2021-11-09

Page: 55-61

Rabiya Siraj *

Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

Bushra Shamim

Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

Muhammad Ayub Mansoor

Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

Imtiaz Ali

Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

Ashok Kumar

Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

Muhammad Imran Siraj

Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Background and Objective: An intravenous pyelogram (IVP) is an x-ray examination of kidneys, ureters, and urinary bladder that uses iodinated contrast material injected into veins. IVP may not be safe for people with dehydration, significantly impaired kidney function, or diabetes. Our main objective is to determine mean change in temperature, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation with an intravenous pyelogram before and during the procedure and to evaluate the acute complications of an intravenous pyelogram.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional prospective study was conducted in the X-Ray department of radiology of a tertiary care hospital in Karachi in 6 months period from 03-08-2019 to 02-02-2020. The data was collected by evaluating patients during the IVP procedure over a specified period. A total of 262 patients were included. Vitals were recorded and complications were documented during and after the procedure. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Stratification was done and the post-stratification Chi-Square test was applied and a p-value ≤0.05 was considered as significant.

Results: After the IV pyelogram mean temperature, respiratory rate, systolic BP, diastolic BP, heart rate, and oxygen saturation were 98.97±0.76 0F, 14.93±1.79 breaths/min, 124.99±7.47 mmHg, 82.11±11.42 mmHg, 76.39±4.29 beats/min, and 99.09±0.68 respectively. Allergy was 14.1%, nausea was 17.2%, vomiting was 3.1%, itching was 7.3%, and dizziness was 18.3% during the procedure. After the procedure, allergy was 3.8%, nausea was 24%, vomiting was 3.4%, itching was 3.8%, and dizziness was 23.7%. These differences were also found significant.

Conclusion: Before and after the IV pyelogram, the mean difference for temperature, respiratory rate, systolic BP, diastolic BP, and oxygen saturation was significant and needs to be evaluated.

Keywords: Temperature, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, intravenous pyelogram, acute complications

How to Cite

Siraj, R., Shamim, B., Mansoor, M. A., Ali, I., Kumar, A., & Siraj, M. I. (2021). Effect of Intravenous Pyelogram on Vital Parameters: A Study Focusing on Complications. Asian Journal of Research in Medicine and Medical Science, 3(1), 55–61. Retrieved from https://globalpresshub.com/index.php/AJRMMS/article/view/1332


Download data is not yet available.


Ulusan S, Koc Z, Tokmak N. Accuracy of sonography for detecting renal stone: comparison with CT. J Clin Ultraso. 2007; 35(5):256-61.

Johri N, Cooper B, Robertson W, Choong S, Rickards D, Unwin R. An update and practical guide to renal stone management. Nephron Clin Pract. 2010; 116(3):159-71.

Teichman JM. Acute renal colic from ureteral calculus. New Eng J Med. 2004; 350(7):684-93.

Intravenous Pyelogram (IVP). 2017 [updated 2017; cited 2017 25th October]; Available:https://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=ivp#overview.

Lojanapiwat B, Rod-Ong P, Kitirattrakarn P, Chongruksut W. Guy’s Stone Score (GSS) Based on Intravenous Pyelogram (IVP) Findings Predicting Upper Pole Access Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) Outcomes. Advan Urol. 2016;1-6.

Intravenous Pyelography (IVP, Excretory Urography). 2015 [updated 2015; cited 2017 25th October];


Yilmaz S, Sindel T, Arslan G, Ozkaynak C, Karaali K,Kabaalioglu A, et al. Renal colic: comparison of spiral CT, US and IVU in the detection of ureteral calculi. Eur Radiol. 1998;8:212-7.

Niall O, Russell J, MacGregor R, Duncan H, Mullins J. A comparison of noncontrast computerized tomography with excretory urography in the assessment of acute flank pain. J Urol. 1999;161:534-7.

Spencer BA, Wood BJ, Dretler SP. Helical CT and ureteral colic. Urol Clin North Am. 2000;27:231-41.

Bailey SM, Evans DW, Fleming HA. Intravenous urography in investigation of hypertension. Lancet. 1975;306(7924): 57-8.

Hale Z, Hanna E, Miyake M, Rosser CJ. Imaging the urologic patient: the utility of intravenous pyelogram in the CT scan era. World J Urol. 2014;32(1):137-42.

Lewis PJ, Bulpitt CJ, Sherwood T, Dollery CT. Routine intravenous urography in the investigation of hypertension. J Chron Dis. 1976;29(12):785-91.

Heidenreich A, Desgrandschamps F, Terrier F. Modern approach of diagnosis and management of acute flank pain: review of all imaging modalities. Europ Urol. 2002;41(4):351-62.

Lim GS, Jang SH, Son JH, Lee JW, Hwang JS, Lim CH, et al. Comparison of non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography and intravenous pyelogram for detection of patients with urinary calculi. Korean J Urol. 2014;55(2):120-3.

Smith RC, Rosenfield AT, Choe KA, Essenmacher KR, Verga M, Glickman MG, et al. Acute flank pain: comparison of non-contrast-enhanced CT and intravenous urography. Radiology 1995; 194:789-94.

Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasingsource of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357:2277-84.

Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, Ting HH, etal. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imagingprocedures. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361:849-57.

Katz SI, Saluja S, Brink JA, Forman HP. Radiation dose associated with unenhanced CT for suspected renal colic: impact of repetitive studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:1120-4.

Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, Prevedello LM, Nawfel RD, Hanson R, et al. Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology. 2009;251:175-84.

Ferrandino MN, Bagrodia A, Pierre SA, Scales CD Jr, Rampersaud E, Pearle MS, et al. Radiation exposure in the acute and short-term management of urolithiasis at 2 academic centers. J Urol. 2009;181: 668-72.