Use of contrast media in neuroimaging

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 633-648

  Essig, Marco ^a   Dinkel, Julien ^b   Gutierrez, Juan E ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^b MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

Author keywords

CNS imaging; Contrast media; DSC perfusion MRI; Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM CHELATE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; GADOLINIUM;

ADENOHYPOPHYSIS; ASTROCYTOMA; BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER; BRAIN ABSCESS; BRAIN MAPPING; BRAIN METASTASIS; CANCER GRADING; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CHOROID PLEXUS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; DRUG DOSE ESCALATION; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; DRUG INDICATION; DRUG MEGADOSE; FOLLOW UP; FUNCTIONAL NEUROIMAGING; HUMAN; MAGNETIC FIELD; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NEUROIMAGING; PERFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; PINEAL BODY; PREDICTION; RECOMMENDED DRUG DOSE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SINGLE DRUG DOSE; TREATMENT PLANNING; TUMOR VOLUME; VIRUS ENCEPHALITIS; BRAIN DISEASE; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; METHODOLOGY; NEURORADIOLOGY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

BRAIN DISEASES; CONTRAST MEDIA; GADOLINIUM; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEURORADIOGRAPHY;

EID: 84867843535     PISSN: 10649689     EISSN: 15579786     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2012.08.001     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. McMicken D.B. Emergency CT head scans in traumatic and atraumatic conditions. Ann Emerg Med 1986, 15(3):274-279.
2. Smirniotopoulos J.G., Murphy F.M., Rushing E.J., et al. Patterns of contrast enhancement in the brain and meninges. Radiographics 2007, 27(2):525-551.
3. Brant-Zawadzki M., Norman D., Newton T.H., et al. Magnetic resonance of the brain: the optimal screening technique. Radiology 1984, 152(1):71-77.
4. Muroff L.R., Runge V.M. The use of MR contrast in neoplastic disease of the brain. Top Magn Reson Imaging 1995, 7(3):137-157.
5. Erickson B.J., Campeau N.G., Schreiner S.A., et al. Triple-dose contrast/magnetization transfer suppressed imaging of 'non-enhancing' brain gliomas. J Neurooncol 2002, 60(1):25-29.
6. Schneider G., Kirchin M.A., Pirovano G., et al. Gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of intracranial metastases: effect of dose on lesion detection and delineation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001, 14(5):525-539.
7. Bart J., Groen H.J., Hendrikse N.H., et al. The blood-brain barrier and oncology: new insights into function and modulation. Cancer Treat Rev 2000, 26(6):449-462.
8. Neuwelt E.A. Mechanisms of disease: the blood-brain barrier. Neurosurgery 2004, 54(1):131-140.
9. Gururangan S., Friedman H.S. Innovations in design and delivery of chemotherapy for brain tumors. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2002, 12(4):583-597.
10. Demeule M., Regina A., Jodoin J., et al. Drug transport to the brain: key roles for the efflux pump P-glycoprotein in the blood-brain barrier. Vascul Pharmacol 2002, 38(6):339-348.
11. Kemper E.M., Boogerd W., Thuis I., et al. Modulation of the blood-brain barrier in oncology: therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of brain tumours?. Cancer Treat Rev 2004, 30(5):415-423.
12. Rautioa J., Chikhale P.J. Drug delivery systems for brain tumor therapy. Curr Pharm Des 2004, 10(12):1341-1353.
13. Kroll R.A., Neuwelt E.A. Outwitting the blood-brain barrier for therapeutic purposes: osmotic opening and other means. Neurosurgery 1998, 42(5):1083-1099.
14. Sage M.R., Wilson A.J., Scroop R. Contrast media and the brain: the basis of CT and MR imaging enhancement. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 1998, 8:695-707.
15. Meltzer C.C., Fukui M.B., Kanal E., et al. MR imaging of the meninges. I. Normal anatomic features and nonneoplastic disease. Radiology 1996, 201:297-308.
16. Burke J.W., Podrasky A.E., Bradley W.G. Meninges: benign postoperative enhancement on MR images. Radiology 1990, 174:99-102.
17. Paldino M., Mogilner A.Y., Tenner M.S. Intracranial hypotension syndrome: a comprehensive review. Neurosurg Focus 2003, 15:1-8.
18. Buetow M.P., Buetow P.C., Smirniotopoulos J.G. Typical, atypical, and misleading features in meningioma. Radiographics 1991, 11:1087-1106.
19. Gupta S., Gupta R.K., Banerjee D., et al. Problems with the dural tail sign. Neuroradiology 1993, 35:541-542.
20. Nagele T., Petersen D., Klose U., et al. The dural tail adjacent to meningiomas studied by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a comparison with histopathology. Neuroradiology 1994, 36:303-307.
21. Van Sorge N.M., Doran K.S. Defense at the border: the blood-brain barrier versus bacterial foreigners. Future Microbiol 2012, 7(3):383-394.
22. Kido G., Wright J.L., Merchant R.E. Acute effects of human recombinant tumor necrosis factor-alpha on the cerebral vasculature of the rat in both normal brain and in an experimental glioma model. J Neurooncol 1991, 10(2):95-109.
23. Schneider S.W., Ludwig T., Tatenhorst L., et al. Glioblastoma cells release factors that disrupt blood-brain barrier features. Acta Neuropathol 2004, 107(3):272-276.
24. Earnest F., Kelly P.J., Scheithauer B.W., et al. Cerebral astrocytomas: histopathologic correlation of MR and CT contrast enhancement with stereotactic biopsy. Radiology 1988, 166(3):823-827.
25. Fidler I.J., Yano S., Zhang R.D., et al. The seed and soil hypothesis: vascularisation and brain metastases. Lancet Oncol 2002, 3(1):53-57.
26. Groothuis D.R. The blood-brain and blood-tumor barriers: a review of strategies for increasing drug delivery. Neuro Oncol 2000, 2(1):45-59.
27. Holodny A.I., Nusbaum A.O., Festa S., et al. Correlation between the degree of contrast enhancement and the volume of peritumoral edema in meningiomas and malignant gliomas. Neuroradiology 1999, 41(11):820-825.
28. Pronin I.N., Holodny A.I., Petraikin A.V. MRI of high-grade glial tumors: correlation between the degree of contrast enhancement and the volume of surrounding edema. Neuroradiology 1997, 39(5):348-350.
29. Runge V.M. A review of contrast media research in 1999-2000. Invest Radiol 2001, 36(2):123-130.
30. Wilkinson I.D., Jellineck D.A., Levy D., et al. Dexamethasone and enhancing solitary cerebral mass lesions: alterations in perfusion and blood-tumor barrier kinetics shown by magnetic resonance imaging. Neurosurgery 2006, 58(4):640-646.
31. Burke J.W., Mathews V.P., Elster A.D., et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetization transfer saturation imaging improves MR detection of herpes simplex encephalitis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1996, 17:773-776.
32. Davis J.M., Davis K.R., Kleinman G.M., et al. Computed tomography of herpes simplex encephalitis, with clinicopathological correlation. Radiology 1978, 129:409-417.
33. Zimmerman R.D., Russell E.J., Leeds N.E., et al. CT in the early diagnosis of herpes simplex encephalitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1980, 134:61-66.
34. Enzmann D.R., Ranson B., Norman D., et al. Computed tomography of herpes simplex encephalitis. Radiology 1978, 129:419-425.
35. Mullins M.E. Emergent neuroimaging of intracranial infection/inflammation. Radiol Clin North Am 2011, 49(1):47-62.
36. Brant-Zawadzki M., Enzmann D.R., Placone R.C., et al. NMR imaging of experimental brain abscess: comparison with CT. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1983, 4:250-253.
37. Britt R.H., Enzmann D.R., Placone R.C., et al. Experimental anaerobic brain abscess. J Neurosurg 1984, 60:1148-1159.
38. Masdeu J.C., Moreira J., Trasi S., et al. The open ring: a new imaging sign in demyelinating disease. J Neuroimaging 1996, 6:104-107.
39. Masdeu J.C., Quinto C., Olivera C., et al. Open-ring imaging sign: highly specific for atypical brain demyelination. Neurology 2000, 54:1427-1433.
40. Bot J.C., Barkhof F., Nijeholt G., et al. Differentiation of multiple sclerosis from other inflammatory disorders and cerebrovascular disease: value of spinal MR imaging. Radiology 2002, 223:46-56.
41. Von Kummer V., Meyding-Lamade U., Forsting M., et al. Sensitivity and prognostic value of early CT in occlusion of middle cerebral artery trunk. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994, 15:9-15.
42. Moulin T., Cattin F., Crepin-Leblond T., et al. Early CT signs in acute middle cerebral artery infarction: predictive value for subsequent infarct locations and outcome. Neurology 1996, 47:366-375.
43. Koenig M., Kraus M., Theek C., et al. Quantitative assessment of the ischemic brain by means of perfusion related parameters derived from perfusion CT. Stroke 2001, 32:431-437.
44. Tomandl B.F., Klotz E., Handsch u R., et al. Comprehensive imaging of ischemic stroke with multisection CT. Radiographics 2003, 23:565-592.
45. Srinivasan A., Goyal M., Al Azri F., et al. State-of-the-art imaging of acute stroke. Radiographics 2006, 26(Suppl 1):S75-S95.
46. Karonen J.O., Vanninen R.L., Liu Y., et al. Combined diffusion and perfusion MRI with correlation to single-photon emission CT in acute ischemic stroke. Ischemic penumbra predicts infarct growth. Stroke 1999, 30:1583-1590.
47. Furlan M., Marchal G., Viader F., et al. Spontaneous neurological recovery after stroke and the fate of the ischemic penumbra. Ann Neurol 1996, 40:216-226.
48. Cha S., Knopp E.A., Johnson G., et al. Intracranial mass lesions: dynamic contrast-enhanced susceptibility-weighted echo-planar perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2002, 223(1):11-29.
49. Hartmann M., Heiland S., Harting I., et al. Distinguishing of primary cerebral lymphoma from high-grade glioma with perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Neurosci Lett 2003, 338(2):119-122.
50. Law M., Yang S., Wang H., et al. Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003, 24(10):1989-1998.
51. Weber M.A., Zoubaa S., Schlieter M., et al. Diagnostic performance of spectroscopic and perfusion MRI for distinction of brain tumors. Neurology 2006, 66(12):1899-1906.
52. Law M., Cha S., Knopp E.A., et al. High-grade gliomas and solitary metastases: differentiation by using perfusion and proton spectroscopic MR imaging. Radiology 2002, 222(3):715-721.
53. Law M. MR spectroscopy of brain tumors. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2004, 15(5):291-313.
54. Shin J.H., Lee H.K., Kwun B.D., et al. Using relative cerebral blood flow and volume to evaluate the histopathologic grade of cerebral gliomas: preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002, 179(3):783-789.
55. Warmuth C., Gunther M., Zimmer C. Quantification of blood flow in brain tumors: comparison of arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2003, 228(2):523-532.
56. Lev A., Barzilay E. Synchronized intermittent mandatory insufflation of the endotracheal tube cuff. Intensive Care Med 1983, 9(5):291-293.
57. Sugahara T., Korogi Y., Tomiguchi S., et al. Post therapeutic intraaxial brain tumor: the value of perfusion-sensitive contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiating tumor recurrence from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000, 21(5):901-909.
58. Uematsu H., Maeda M. Double-echo perfusion-weighted MR imaging: basic concepts and application in brain tumors for the assessment of tumor blood volume and vascular permeability. Eur Radiol 2006, 16(1):180-186.
59. Law M., Oh S., Babb J.S., et al. Low-grade gliomas: dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging-prediction of patient clinical response. Radiology 2006, 238(2):658-667.
60. Cha S., Knopp E.A., Johnson G., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced T2-weighted MR imaging of recurrent malignant gliomas treated with thalidomide and carboplatin. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000, 21(5):881-890.
61. Essig M., Waschkies M., Wenz F., et al. Assessment of brain metastases with dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial results. Radiology 2003, 228(1):193-199.
62. Weber M.A., Thilmann C., Lichy M.P., et al. Assessment of irradiated brain metastases by means of arterial spin-labeling and dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI: initial results. Invest Radiol 2004, 39(5):277-287.
63. Hawighorst H., Engenhart R., Knopp M.V., et al. Intracranial meningeomas: time- and dose-dependent effects of irradiation on tumor microcirculation monitored by dynamic MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1997, 15(4):423-432.
64. Hawighorst H., Knopp M.V., Debus J., et al. Pharmacokinetic MRI for assessment of malignant glioma response to stereotactic radiotherapy: initial results. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998, 8(4):783-788.
65. Brix G., Semmler W., Port R., et al. Pharmacokinetic parameters in CNS Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991, 15(4):621-628.
66. Tofts P.S., Kermode A.G. Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med 1991, 17(2):357-367.
67. Padhani A.R., Husband J.E. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI studies in oncology with an emphasis on quantification, validation and human studies. Clin Radiol 2001, 56(8):607-620.
68. Giesel F.L., Bischoff H., von Tengg-Kobligk H., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a feasibility study of noninvasive assessment, therapeutic follow-up, and possible predictor of improved outcome. Chest 2006, 129(6):1570-1576.
69. Martincich L., Montemurro F., De Rosa G., et al. Monitoring response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004, 83(1):67-76.
70. Hawighorst H., Bock M., Knopp M.V., et al. Magnetically labeled water perfusion imaging of the uterine arteries and of normal and malignant cervical tissue: initial experiences. Magn Reson Imaging 1998, 16(3):225-234.
71. de Lussanet Q.G., Langereis S., Beets-Tan R.G., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging kinetic parameters and molecular weight of dendritic contrast agents in tumor angiogenesis in mice. Radiology 2005, 235(1):65-72.
72. Tuncbilek N., Karakas H.M., Altaner S. Dynamic MRI in indirect estimation of microvessel density, histologic grade, and prognosis in colorectal adenocarcinomas. Abdom Imaging 2004, 29(2):166-172.
73. Knopp M.V., Balzer T., Esser M., et al. Assessment of utilization and pharmacovigilance based on spontaneous adverse event reporting of gadopentetate dimeglumine as a magnetic resonance contrast agent after 45 million administrations and 15 years of clinical use. Invest Radiol 2006, 41(6):491-499.
74. Yuh W.T., Nguyen H.D., Tali E.T., et al. Delineation of gliomas with various doses of MR contrast material. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994, 15(5):983-989.
75. Yuh W.T., Tali E.T., Nguyen H.D., et al. The effect of contrast dose, imaging time, and lesion size in the MR detection of intracerebral metastasis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1995, 16(2):373-380.
76. Sze G., Johnson C., Kawamura Y., et al. Comparison of single- and triple-dose contrast material in the MR screening of brain metastases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1998, 19(5):821-828.
77. Van D.P., Sijens P.E., Schmitz P.I., et al. Gd-enhanced MR imaging of brain metastases: contrast as a function of dose and lesion size. Magn Reson Imaging 1997, 15(5):535-541.
78. Ba-Ssalamah A., Nobauer-Huhmann I.M., Pinker K., et al. Effect of contrast dose and field strength in the magnetic resonance detection of brain metastases. Invest Radiol 2003, 38(7):415-422.
79. Haustein J., Laniado M., Niendorf H.P., et al. Administration of gadopentetate dimeglumine in MR imaging of intracranial tumors: dosage and field strength. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1992, 13(4):1199-1206.
80. Schubeus P., Schorner W., Haustein J., et al. Rofo 1990, 153(1):29-35. [in German].
81. Yang M., Christoforidis G.A., Figueredo T., et al. Dosage determination of ultrasmall particles of iron oxide for the delineation of microvasculature in the Wistar rat brain. Invest Radiol 2005, 40(10):655-660.
82. Elster A.D. How much contrast is enough? Dependence of enhancement on field strength and MR pulse sequence. Eur Radiol 1997, 5(Suppl 7):276-280.
83. Chang K.H., Ra D.G., Han M.H., et al. Contrast enhancement of brain tumors at different MR field strengths: comparison of 0.5 T and 2.0 T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994, 15(8):1413-1419.
84. Giesel F.L., von Tengg-Kobligk H., Griffiths P.D., et al. Effects of field strength and protein content on R1 and R2 of different contrast agents 2005, RSNA, SSG 20-07.
85. Krautmacher C., Willinek W.A., Tschampa H.J., et al. Brain tumors: full- and half-dose contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T-initial experience. Radiology 2005, 237(3):1014-1019.
86. Trattnig S., Pinker K., Ba-Ssalamah A., et al. The optimal use of contrast agents at high field MRI. Eur Radiol 2006, 16(6):1280-1287.
87. Brekenfeld C., Foert E., Hundt W., et al. Enhancement of cerebral diseases: how much contrast agent is enough? Comparison of 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 mmol/kg gadoteridol at 0.2 T with 0.1 mmol/kg gadoteridol at 1.5 T. Invest Radiol 2001, 36(5):266-275.
88. Runge V.M., Gelblum D.Y., Pacetti M.L., et al. Gd-HP-DO3A in clinical MR imaging of the brain. Radiology 1990, 177(2):393-400.
89. Haustein J., Laniado M., Niendorf H.P., et al. Triple-dose versus standard-dose gadopentetate dimeglumine: a randomized study in 199 patients. Radiology 1993, 186(3):855-860.
90. Runge V.M., Kirsch J.E., Burke V.J., et al. High-dose gadoteridol in MR imaging of intracranial neoplasms. J Magn Reson Imaging 1992, 2(1):9-18.
91. Haba D., Pasco P.A., Tanguy J.Y., et al. Use of half-dose gadolinium-enhanced MRI and magnetization transfer saturation in brain tumors. Eur Radiol 2001, 11(1):117-122.