Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 m Gadopentetate Dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in five hundred seventy-two patients with known or suspected liver lesions

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 168-176

  Hammersting, Renate ^a   Adam, Gerhard ^b   Ayuso, Juan Ramon Ayuso ^c   Beers, Bernard Van ^d   Belfiore, Giuseppe ^e   Bellin, Marie France ^f   Bongartz, Georg ^g   Ernst, Olivier ^h   Frericks, Bernd ⁱ   Giuseppetti, Gianmarco ^j   Heinz Peer, Gertrud ^k   Laghi, Andrea ^l   Martin, Julio ^m   Pering, Christiane ⁿ   Reimer, Peter ^o   Richter, Götz Martin ^p   Roemer, Frank W ^q   Schäfer, Fritz K W ^r   Vilgrain, Valerie ^s   Vogl, Thomas J ^a,t   Weishaupt, Dominik ^u   Wal, Alexander ^v   Zech, Christoph J ^v   Tombach, Bernd ^u   more..

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL FRANKFURT   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

^c HOSPITAL CLÍNIC   (Spain)

^d CLINIQUES UNIVERSITAIRES SAINT LUC   (Belgium)

^e Azienda Ospedalliera di Rilievo Nazionale di Alta   (Italy)

^f HÔPITAL PAUL BROUSSE   (France)

^g UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BASEL   (Switzerland)

^h LILLE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

ⁱ Ospedale Regionale Torrette   (Italy)

^j UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN   (Germany)

^k MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^l Centre Diagnostic   (Spain)

^m POLICLINICO UMBERTO I   (Italy)

ⁿ STÄDTISCHES KLINIKUM KARLSRUHE   (Germany)

^o LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^p UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^q KLINIKUM AUGSBURG   (Germany)

^r BEAUJON HOSPITAL   (France)

^s UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^t UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

^u CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^v Andreas Bannowsky Ltd   (Germany)

more..

Author keywords

Diagnostic differentiation noninferiority; Gadobutrol; Gadopentetate; Liver lesions; MRI; Safety pro?les

Indexed keywords

GADOBUTROL; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG SAFETY; HUMAN; LIVER INJURY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MULTICENTER STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARESTHESIA; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIDE EFFECT; TASTE DISORDER; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT; VASODILATATION; VITAL SIGN;

EID: 67651062441     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e318198a0ae     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bramhall SR, Gur U, Coldham C, et al. Liver resection for colorectal metastases. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2003;85:334-339.
2. Gazelle GS, Goldberg SN, Solbiati L, et al. Tumor ablation with radio-frequency energy. Radiology. 2000;217:633-646.
3. Forsberg F, Piccoli CW, Liu JB, et al. Hepatic tumor detection: MR imaging and conventional US versus pulse-inversion harmonic US of NC100100 during its reticuloendothelial system-specific phase. Radiology. 2002;222: 824-829.
4. Kamel IR, Choti MA, Horton KM, et al. Surgically staged focal liver lesions: accuracy and reproducibility of dual-phase helical CT for detection and characterization. Radiology. 2003;227:752-757.
5. Mahfouz AE, Hamm B, Wolf KJ. Peripheral washout: a sign of malignancy on dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR images of focal liver lesions. Radiology. 1994;190:49-52.
6. Mitchell DG, Saini S, Weinreb J, et al. Hepatic metastases and cavernous hemangiomas: distinction with standard- and triple-dose gadoteridol-en-hanced MR imaging. Radiology. 1994;193:49-57.
7. Numminen K, Halavaara J, Tervahartiala P, et al. Liver tumour MRI: what do we need for lesion characterization? Scand JGastroenterol. 2004;39:67-73.
8. Yoo HJ, Lee JM, Lee MW, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic liver: double-contrast-enhanced, high-resolution 3.0T-MR imaging with pathologic correlation. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:538-546.
9. Zech CJ, Herrmann KA, Dietrich O, et al. Black-blood diffusion-weighted EPI acquisition of the liver with parallel imaging: comparison with a standard T2-weighted sequence for detection of focal liver lesions. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:261-266.
10. Miller WJ, Baron RL, Dodd GD III, et al. Malignancies in patients with © 2009 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Urcirrhosis: CT sensitivity and specificity in 200 consecutive transplant patients. Radiology. 1994;193:645-650.
11. Baron RL, Oliver JH III. Hepatic perfusion: new perspectives at computed tomography. Rays. 1997;22:270-294.
12. Vogl TJ, Kummel S, Hammerstingl R, et al. Liver tumors: comparison of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. Radiology. 1996;200:59-67.
13. Halavaara J, Breuer J, Ayuso C, et al. Liver tumor characterization: comparison between liver-specific gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MRI and biphasic CT-a multicenter trial. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;30:345-354.
14. Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A, et al. Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology. 2004;230:266-275.
15. Zech CJ, Grazioli L, Breuer J, et al. Diagnostic performance and description of morphological features of focal nodular hyperplasia in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging: results of a multicenter trial. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:504-511.
16. Vogl TJ, Hammerstingl R, Schwarz W, et al. Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced versus gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging for differential diagnosis of focal liver lesions. Radiology. 1996;198:881-887.
17. 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.
18. Gries H. Extracellular MRI contrast agents based on gadolinium. Top Curr Chem. 2002;221:1-24.
19. Goyen M, Herborn CU, Vogt FM, et al. Using a 1 M Gd-chelate (gadobutrol) for total-body three-dimensional MR angiography: preliminary experience. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17:565-571.
20. Tombach B, Benner T, Reimer P, et al. Do highly concentrated gadolinium chelates improve MR brain perfusion imaging? Intraindividually controlled randomized crossover concentration comparison study of 0.5 versus 1.0 mol/L gadobutrol. Radiology. 2003;226:880-888.
21. Tombach B. Whole-body CE-MRA with Gadovist. Eur Radiol. 2004; 14(suppl 5):M26-M27.
22. Vosshenrich R, Engeroff B, Obenauer S, et al. [Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the arterial and portovenous system of the liver with varying concentrations of contrast medium]. Rofo. 2003;175:1239-1243.
23. Hentsch A, Aschauer MA, Balzer JO, et al. Gadobutrol-enhanced moving-table magnetic resonance angiography in patients with peripheral vascular disease: a prospective, multi-centre blinded comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:2103-2114.
24. Huppertz A, Rohrer M. Gadobutrol, a highly concentrated MR-imaging contrast agent: its physicochemical characteristics and the basis for its use in contrast-enhanced MR angiography and perfusion imaging. Eur. Radiol. 2004;14(suppl 5):M12-M18.
25. Schaefer FK, Schaefer PJ, Altjohann C, et al. A multicenter, site-independent, blinded study to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography using 1.0M gadobutrol (Gadovist) to in-traarterial digital subtraction angiography in body arteries. Eur J Radiol. 2007;61:315-323.
26. Goyen M, Lauenstein TC, Herborn CU, et al. 0.5 M Gd chelate (Magnevist) versus 1.0 M Gd chelate (Gadovist): dose-independent effect on image quality of pelvic three-dimensional MR-angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001; 14:602-607.
27. Herborn CU, Lauenstein TC, Ruehm SG, et al. Intraindividual comparison of gadopentetate dimeglumine, gadobenate dimeglumine, and gadobutrol for pelvic 3D magnetic resonance angiography. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:27-33.
28. Grobner T. Gadolinium-a specific trigger for the development of nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis? Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2006;21:1104-1108.
29. Thomsen HS, Morcos SK, Dawson P. Is there a causal relation between the administration of gadolinium-based contrast media and the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF)? Clin Radiol. 2006;61:905-906.
30. Khurram M, Skov L, Rossen K, et al. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a serious iatrogenic disease of renal failure patients. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2007;41: 565-566.
31. Staks T, Schuhmann-Giampieri G, Frenzel T, et al. Pharmacokinetics, dose proportionality, and tolerability of gadobutrol after single intravenous injection in healthy volunteers. Invest Radiol. 1994;29:709-715.
32. Schmitt-Willich H. Stability of linear and macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agents. Br J Radiol. 2007;80:581-582.
33. 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.
34. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Pharmacokinetics of 1M gadobutrol in patients with chronic renal failure. Invest Radiol. 2000;35:35- 40. 40.
35. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Renal tolerance of a neutral gadolinium chelate (gadobutrol) in patients with chronic renal failure: results 41. of a randomized study. Radiology. 2001;218:651-657.
36. Tombach B, Bremer C, Reimer P, et al. Using highly concentrated gadobutrol as an MR contrast agent in patients also requiring hemodialysis: safety and dialysability. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178:105-109.
37. Knopp MV, Balzer T, Esser M, et al. Assessment of utilization and 42. pharmacovigilance based on spontaneous adverse event reporting of gadopentetate dimeglumine as a magnetic resonance contrast agent after 43. 45 million administrations and 15 years of clinical use. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:491-499.
38. Deo A, Fogel M, Cowper SE. Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a population study examining the relationship of disease development to gadolinium 44. exposure. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007;2:264-267.
39. Todd DJ, Kagan A, Chibnik LB, et al. Cutaneous changes of nephrogenicsystemic fibrosis: predictor of early mortality and association with gadolinium exposure. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56:3433-3441.
40. Obuchowski NA. Sample size calculations in studies of test accuracy. StatMethods Med Res. 1998;7:371-392.
41. Tombach B, Bohndorf K, Brodtrager W, et al. Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadopentate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI in 471 patients with known or suspected renal lesions: results of a multicenter, single-blind, interindividual, randomized clinical phase III trial. Eur Radiol.2008;18:2610-2619.
42. Niendorf HP, Brasch RC. [Gadolinium-DTPA tolerance and clinical safety]. Rontgenpraxis. 1997;50:354-363.
43. Niendorf HP, Michel A, Loewe A Safety and risk of gadolinium-DTPA: Extended clinical experience after more than 69 million applications. In: Felix R, Heshiki A, Hricak H, eds. Magnevist Monograph. Oxford, England: Blackwell; 2007.
44. Tombach B, Heindel W. Value of 1.0 M gadolinium chelates: review of preclinical and clinical data on gadobutrol. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:1550-1556.