Time-resolved contrast-enhanced three-dimensional pulmonary MR-angiography: 1.0 M gadobutrol vs. 0.5 M gadopentetate dimeglumine

✍ Scribed by Christian Fink; Michael Bock; Fabian Kiessling; Matthias Philipp Lichy; Radko Krissak; Ivan Zuna; Astrid Schmähl; Stefan Delorme; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 2004
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 327 KB
• Volume: 19
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1053-1807
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.10452

✦ Synopsis

Abstract

Purpose

To compare contrast characteristics and image quality of 1.0 M gadobutrol with 0.5 M Gd‐DTPA for time‐resolved three‐dimensional pulmonary magnetic resonance angiography (MRA).

Materials and Methods

Thirty‐one patients and five healthy volunteers were examined with a contrast‐enhanced time‐resolved pulmonary MRA protocol (fast low‐angle shot [FLASH] three‐dimensional, TR/TE = 2.2/1.0 msec, flip angle: 25°, scan time per three‐dimensional data set = 5.6 seconds). Patients were randomized to receive either 0.1 mmol/kg body weight (bw) or 0.2 mmol/kg bw gadobutrol, or 0.2 mmol/kg bw Gd‐DTPA. Volunteers were examined three times, twice with 0.2 mmol/kg bw gadobutrol using two different flip angles and once with 0.2 mmol/kg bw Gd‐DTPA. All contrast injections were performed at a rate of 5 mL/second. Image analysis included signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) and contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) measurements in lung arteries and veins, as well as a subjective analysis of image quality.

Results

In patients, significantly higher SNR and CNR were observed with Gd‐DTPA compared to both doses of gadobutrol (SNR: 35–42 vs.17–25; CNR 33–39 vs. 16–23; P ≤ 0.05). No relevant differences were observed between 0.1 mmol/kg bw and 0.2 mmol/kg bw gadobutrol. In volunteers, gadobutrol and Gd‐DTPA achieved similar SNR and CNR. A significantly higher SNR and CNR was observed for gadobutrol‐enhanced MRA with an increased flip angle of 40°. Image quality was rated equal for both contrast agents.

Conclusion

No relevant advantages of 1.0 M gadobutrol over 0.5 M Gd‐DTPA were observed for time‐resolved pulmonary MRA in this study. Potential explanations are T2/T2*‐effects caused by the high intravascular concentration when using high injection rates. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004;19:202–208. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.