Intra-individual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the supraaortic vessels at 3 tesla

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 43, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 695-702

  Bueltmann, Eva ^a,b   Erb, Gunter ^c   Kirchin, Miles A ^d   Klose, Uwe ^a   Naegele, Thomas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^b HANNOVER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Germany)

^c Bracco Imaging Deutschland GmbH   (Germany)

^d Bracco Imaging SpA   (Italy)

Author keywords

3 Tesla; Contrast agent; Magnetic resonance angiography

Indexed keywords

GADOBENATE DIMEGLUMINE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; DRUG DERIVATIVE; GADOBENIC ACID; MEGLUMINE; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND;

ADULT; ANGIOGRAPHY; ANTERIOR CEREBRAL ARTERY; ARTICLE; BASILAR ARTERY; BLOOD VESSEL; BRAIN ARTERY; BRAIN CIRCULUS ARTERIOSUS; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERNAL CAROTID ARTERY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; MIDDLE CEREBRAL ARTERY; NEUROIMAGING; NORMAL HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSTERIOR CEREBRAL ARTERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; VERTEBRAL ARTERY; ADOLESCENT; AORTA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AORTA; CONTRAST MEDIA; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; MEGLUMINE; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 58149380223     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31817d1505     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Serfaty JM, Chirossel P, Chevallier JM, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography in the assessment of extracranial carotid artery disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 175: 455-463.
2. Huston J III, Fain SB, Wald JT, et al. Carotid artery: elliptic centric contrast-enhanced MR angiography compared with conventional angiography. Radiology. 2001;218:138-143.
3. Lenhart M, Framme N, Volk M, et al. Time-resolved contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the carotid arteries: diagnostic accuracy and inter-observer variability compared with selective catheter angiography. Invest Radiol. 2002;37:535-541.
4. Wutke R, Lang W, Fellner C, et al. High-resolution, contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography with elliptical centric k-space ordering of supra-aortic arteries compared with selective X-ray angiography. Stroke. 2002;33:1522-1529.
5. Remonda L, Senn P, Barth A, et al. Contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography of the carotid artery: comparison with conventional digital subtraction angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2002;23:213-219.
6. Johnston DC, Eastwood JD, Nguyen T, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of carotid arteries: utility in routine clinical practice. Stroke. 2002;33:2834-2838.
7. Nederkoorn PJ, Elgersma OE, van der Graaf Y, et al. Carotid artery stenosis: accuracy of contrast-enhanced MR angiography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2003;228:677-682.
8. Wilman AH, Riederer SJ. Performance of an elliptical centric view order for signal enhancement and motion artifact suppression in breath-hold three-dimensional gradient echo imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1997;38: 793-802.
9. Jeong EK, Parker DL, Tsuruda JS, et al. Reduction of flow-related signal loss in flow compensated 3D TOF MR angiography, using variable echo time (3D TOF-VTE). Magn Reson Med. 2002;48:667-676.
10. Mitra D, Connolly D, Jenkins S, et al. Comparison of image quality, diagnostic confidence and interobserver variability in contrast enhanced MR angiography and 2D time of flight angiography in evaluation of carotid stenosis. Br J Radiol. 2006;79:201-207.
11. Anzalone N, Scomazzoni F, Castellano R, et al. Carotid artery stenosis: intra-individual correlations of unenhanced MR angiography, and digital subtraction angiography versus rotational angiography for detection and grading. Radiology. 2005;236:204-221.
12. Willinek WA, von Falkenhausen M, Born M, et al. Noninvasive detection of steno-occlusive disease of the supra-aortic arteries with three-dimensional contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: a prospective, intra-individual comparative analysis with digital subtraction angiography. Stroke. 2005;36:38-43.
13. Sumi T, Sumi M, Van Cauteren M, et al. Parallel imaging technique for the external carotid artery and its branches: comparison of balanced turbo field echo, phase contrast, and time-of-flight sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;25:1028-1034.
14. DeLano MC, DeMarco JK. 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MR angiography of the head and neck. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2006;16:321-341.
15. DeMarco JK, Huston J III, Nash AK. Extracranial carotid MR imaging at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2006;14:109 - 121.
16. Diehm N, Kickuth R, Baumgartner I, et al. Magnetic resonance angiog-raphy in infrapopliteal arterial disease: prospective comparison of 1. 5 and 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2007;42:467 - 476.
17. Kramer H, Michaely HJ, Matschl V, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance angiography of the lower extremities with a dedicated 36-element matrix coil at 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2007;42:477-483.
18. Nael K, Michaely HJ, Villablanca P, et al. Time-resolved contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the head and neck at 3.0 Tesla: initial results. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:l 16-124.
19. Nael K, Ruehm SG, Michaely HJ, et al. High spatial-resolution CE-MRA of the carotid circulation with parallel imaging: comparison of image quality between 2 different acceleration factors at 3.0 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:391-399.
20. Nael K, Villablanca JP, Saleh R, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography at 3T in the evaluation of intracranial aneurysms: a comparison with time-of-flight MR angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2006;27: 2118-2121.
21. de Haen C, Cabrini M, Akhnana L, et al. Gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M solution for injection (MultiHance) pharmaceutical formulation and physicochemical properties of a new magnetic resonance imaging contrast medium. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1999;23(suppl 1):S161-S168.
22. Pintaske J, Martirosian P, Graf H, et al. Relaxivity of gadopentetate dimeglumine (Magnevist), gadobutrol (Gadovist), and gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance) in human blood plasma at 0.2, 1.5, and 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:213-221. [Erratum in: Invest Radiol. 2006;41: 859.]
23. Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, et al. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:715-724.
24. Laurent S, Elst LV, Muller RN. Comparative study of the physicochemical properties of six clinical low molecular weight gadolinium contrast agents. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2006;l:128-137.
25. Kirchin MA, Runge VM. Contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging: safety update. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2003; 14:426 - 435.
26. Kirchin MA, Pirovano G, Venetianer C, et al. Safety assessment of gadobenate dimeglumine (Multihance): extended clinical experience from phase I studies to postmarketing surveillance. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14:281-294.
27. Shellock FG, Parker JR, Venetianer C, et al. Safety of gadobenate dimeglumine: summary of findings from clinical studies and post-marketing surveillance. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:500-509.
28. Shellock FG, Parker JR, Pirovano G, et al. Safety characteristics of gadobenate dimeglumine: clinical experience from intra- and interindi-vidual comparison studies with gadopentetate dimeglumine. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24:1378-1385.
29. Kim JI, Lee JM, Choi JY, et al. The value of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced delayed phase MR imaging for characterization of hepatocellular nodules in the cirrhotic liver. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:202-210.
30. Cavagna FM, Maggioni F, Castelli PM, et al. Gadolinium chelates with weak binding to serum proteins. A new class of high-efficiency, general purpose contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 1997;32:780-796.
31. Giesel FL, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Wilkinson ID, et al. Influence of human serum albumin on longitudinal and transverse relaxation rates (Rl and R2) of magnetic resonance contrast agents. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:222-228.
32. Knopp MV, Schoenberg SO, Rehm C, et al. Assessment of gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) for MR angiography: phase I studies. Invest Radiol. 2002;37:706-715.
33. Knopp MV, Giesel FL, von Tengg-Kobligk H, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the run-off vasculature: intraindividual comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine with gadopentetate dimeglumine. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17:694-702.
34. Volk M, Strotzer M, Lenhart M, et al. Renal time-resolved MR angiography: quantitative comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine with different doses. Radiology. 2001 ;220:484-488.
35. Wyttenbach R, Gianella S, Alerci M, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of Gd-DOTA - versus Gd-BOPTA - enhanced peripheral MR angiography, as compared with digital subtraction angiography. Radiology. 2003;227:261-269.
36. Prokop M, Schneider G, Vanzulli A, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the renal arteries: blinded multicenter crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology. 2005;234:399-408.
37. Pediconi F, Fraioli F, Catalano C, et al. Gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) vs. gadopentetate dimeglumine (Gd-DTPA) for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA): improvement in intravascular signal intensity and contrast to noise ratio. Radiol Med (Torino). 2003; 106:87-93.
38. Anzalone N, Scotti R, Iadanza A. MR angiography of the carotid arteries and intracranial circulation: advantage of a high relaxivity contrast agent. Neuroradiology. 2006;48(suppl 1):9-17.
39. Stock KW, Radue EW, Jacob AL, et al. Intracranial arteries: prospective blinded comparative study of MR angiography and DSA in 50 patients. Radiology. 1995;195:451-456.
40. Oelerich M, Lentschig MG, Zunker P, et al. Intracranial vascular stenosis and occlusion: comparison of 3D time-of-flight and 3D phase-contrast MR angiography. Neuroradiology. 1998;40:567 - 573.
41. Heidenreich JO, Schilling AM, Unterharnscheidt F, et al. Assessment of 3D-TOF-MRA at 3.0 Tesla in the characterization of the angioarchitec-ture of cerebral arteriovenous malformations: a preliminary study. Acta Radiol. 2007;48:678-686.
42. Blatter DD, Parker DL, Robison RO. Cerebral MR angiography with multiple overlapping thin slab acquisition. Part I. Quantitative analysis of vessel visibility. Radiology. 1991 ;179:805 - 811.
43. Parker DL, Tsuruda JS, Goodrich KC, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of cerebral arteries. A review. Invest Radiol. 1998;33:560-572.
44. Sohn CH, Sevick RJ, Frayne R. Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the intracranial circulation. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2003;11: 599-614.
45. Okumura A, Araki Y, Nishimura Y, et al. The clinical utility of contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography for cerebrovascular disease. Neurol Res. 2001;23:767-771.
46. Willinek WA, Bayer T, Gieseke J, et al. High spatial resolution contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the supraaortic arteries using the quadrature body coil at 3.0T: a feasibility study. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:618-625.
47. Markl M, Uhl M, Wieben O, et al. High resolution 3T MRI for the assessment of cervical and superficial cranial arteries in giant cell arteritis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24:423-427.
48. Knopp MV, Runge VM, Essig M, et al. Primary and secondary brain tumors at MR imaging: bicentric intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology. 2004;230:55-64.
49. Colosimo C, Knopp MV, Barreau X, et al. A comparison of Gd-BOPTA and Gd-DOTA for contrast-enhanced MRI of intracranial tumours. Neuroradiology. 2004;46:655-665.
50. Maravilla KR, Maldjian JA, Schmalfuss IM, et al. Contrast enhancement of central nervous system lesions: multicenter intraindividual crossover comparative study of two MR contrast agents. Radiology. 2006;240: 389-400.
51. Kuhn MJ, Picozzi P, Maldjian JA, et al. Evaluation of intraaxial enhancing brain tumors on magnetic resonance imaging: intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for visualization and assessment, and implications for surgical intervention. J Neurosurg. 2007; 106:557 - 566.
52. Pediconi F, Catalano C, Occhiato R, et al. Breast lesion detection and characterization at contrast-enhanced MR mammography: gadobenate dimeglumine versus gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology. 2005;237: 45-56.
53. Balci NC, Inan N, Anik Y, et al. Low-dose gadobenate dimeglumine versus standard-dose gadopentate dimeglumine for delayed contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Acad Radiol. 2006; 13: 833-839.
54. Runge VM, Biswas J, Wintersperger BJ, et al. The efficacy of gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) at 3 Tesla in brain magnetic resonance imaging: comparison to 1. 5 Tesla and a standard gadolinium chelate using a rat brain tumor model. Invest Radiol. 2006; 41:244-248.
55. Nael K, Fenchel M, Krishnam M, et al. 3.0 Tesla high spatial resolution contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) of the pulmonary circulation: initial experience with a 32-channel phased array coil using a high relaxivity contrast agent. Invest Radiol. 2007;42:392 - 398.
56. Yuh WT, Fisher DJ, Engelken JD, et al. MR evaluation of CNS tumors: dose comparison study with gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoteri-dol. Radiology. 1991;180:485-491.
57. Kanal E, Broome DR, Martin DR, et al. Response to the FDA's May 23, 2007, nephrogenic systemic fibrosis update. Radiology. 2008; 246:11-14.
58. Bleicher AG, Kanal E. A serial dilution study of gadolinium-based MR imaging agents. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29:668-673.
59. Yrjana SK, Vaara T, Karttunen A, et al. Pulse repetition time and contrast enhancement: simulation study of Gd-BOPTA and conventional contrast agent at different field strengths. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:267-275.
60. Sardanelli F, Fausto A, Esseridou A, et al. Gadobenate dimeglumine as a contrast agent for dynamic breast magnetic resonance imaging: effect of higher initial enhancement thresholds on diagnostic performance. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:236-242.