Dose comparison of single versus double dose in contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography of the renal arteries: Intra-individual cross-over blinded trial using Gd-DTPA

European Radiology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 67-72

  Heverhagen, J T ^a,b   Wright, C L ^a   Schmalbrock, P ^a   Knopp, M V ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL MARBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Contrast agent; Intraindividual comparison; Magnetic resonance angiography; Renal arteries

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSSOVER PROCEDURE; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE QUALITY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RENAL ARTERY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ADULT; CONTRAST MEDIA; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; RENAL ARTERY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD;

EID: 59249099655     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-1120-9     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Leiner T, de Haan MW, Nelemans PJ et al (2005) Contemporary imaging techniques for the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Eur Radiol 15:2219-2229
2. Waugh JR, Sacharias N (1992) Arteriographic complications in the DSA era. Radiology 182:243-246
3. Young N, Chi KK, Ajaka J et al (2002) Complications with outpatient angiography and interventional procedures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 25:123-126
4. Cochran ST, Bomyea K, Sayre JW (2001) Trends in adverse events after IV administration of contrast media. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:1385-1388
5. Dumoulin CL, Hart HR Jr. (1986) Magnetic resonance angiography. Radiology 161:717-720
6. Edelman RR, Zhao B, Liu C et al (1989) MR angiography and dynamic flow evaluation of the portal venous system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 153:755-760
7. Grist TM (2000) MRA of the abdominal aorta and lower extremities. J Magn Reson Imaging 11:32-43
8. Yucel EK, Anderson CM, Edelman RR et al (1999) AHA scientific statement. Magnetic resonance angiography: Update on applications for extracranial arteries. Circulation 100:2284-2301
9. van Helvoort-Postulart D, Dirksen CD, Kroon AA et al (2006) Cost analysis of procedures related to the management of renal artery stenosis from various perspectives. Eur Radiol 16:154-160
10. Thomsen HS (2006) Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: A serious late adverse reaction to gadodiamide. Eur Radiol 16:2619-2621
11. Heverhagen JT (2007) Noise measurement and estimation in MR imaging experiments. Radiology 245:638-639
12. Frayne R, Grist TM, Swan JS et al (2000) 3D MR DSA: Effects of injection protocol and image masking. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:476-487
13. Heverhagen JT, Funck RC, Schwarz U et al (2001) Kinetic evaluation of an i.v. bolus of MR contrast media. Magn Reson Imaging 19:1025-1030
14. Heverhagen JT, Reitz I, Pavlicova M et al (2007) The impact of the dosage of intravenous gadolinium-chelates on the vascular signal intensity in MR angiography. Eur Radiol 17:626-637