Literature DB >> 11606840

Comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine with gadopentetate dimeglumine for magnetic resonance imaging of liver tumors.

R Kuwatsuru1, M Kadoya, K Ohtomo, A Tanimoto, S Hirohashi, T Murakami, Y Tanaka, K Yoshikawa, H Katayama.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: To compare gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) with gadopentetate dimeglumine (Gd-DTPA) for magnetic resonance imaging of the liver.
METHODS: The contrast agent Gd-BOPTA or Gd-DTPA was administered at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg to 257 patients suspected of having malignant liver tumors. Dynamic phase images, spin-echo images obtained within 10 minutes of injection, and delayed images obtained 40 to 120 minutes after injection were acquired. All postcontrast images were compared with unenhanced T1-weighted and T2-weighted images obtained immediately before injection. A full safety assessment was performed.
RESULTS: The contrast efficacy for dynamic phase imaging was moderately or markedly improved in 90.9% (110/121) and 87.9% (109/124) of patients for Gd-BOPTA and Gd-DTPA, respectively. At 40 to 120 minutes after injection, the cor- responding improvements were 21.7% (26/120) and 11.6% (14/121) for spin-echo sequences and 44.5% (53/119) and 19.0% (23/121) for breath-hold gradient-echo sequences, respectively. The differences at 40 to 120 minutes after injection were statistically significant (P < 0.02). Increased information at 40 to 120 minutes after injection compared with information acquired within 10 minutes of injection was available for 24.0% (29/121) of patients with Gd-BOPTA and for 14.5% (18/124) of patients with Gd-DTPA (P < 0.03). Adverse events were seen in 4.7% (6/128) and 1.6% (2/127) of patients receiving Gd-BOPTA and Gd-DTPA, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of Gd-BOPTA is equivalent to that of Gd-DTPA for liver imaging during the dynamic phase and superior during the delayed (40-120 minutes) phase of contrast enhancement. Both agents are safe for use in magnetic resonance imaging of the liver.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11606840     DOI: 10.1097/00004424-200111000-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  12 in total

Review 1.  [Current status of MRI diagnostics with liver-specific contrast agents. Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-BOPTA].

Authors:  C Stroszczynski; G Gaffke; M Gnauck; F Streitparth; G Wieners; E Lopez-Häninnen
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 0.635

2.  Malignant focal liver lesions at contrast-enhanced ultrasonography and magnetic resonance with hepatospecific contrast agent.

Authors:  M D'Onofrio; S Crosara; R De Robertis; S Canestrini; V Cantisani; G Morana; R Pozzi Mucelli
Journal:  Ultrasound       Date:  2013-12-13

Review 3.  Contrast Agents for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Imaging: Value and Progression.

Authors:  Ying Zhang; Kazushi Numata; Yuewu Du; Shin Maeda
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 5.738

Review 4.  Functional MR Imaging Techniques in Oncology in the Era of Personalized Medicine.

Authors:  Matthias R Benz; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Evis Sala
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 2.266

5.  Left ventricular infarct size assessed with 0.1 mmol/kg of gadobenate dimeglumine correlates with that assessed with 0.2 mmol/kg of gadopentetate dimeglumine.

Authors:  Monravee Tumkosit; Chirapa Puntawangkoon; Tim M Morgan; Hollins P Clark; Craig A Hamilton; William O Ntim; Paige B Clark; W Gregory Hundley
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.826

6.  3.0-T whole-heart coronary magnetic resonance angiography: comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadofosveset trisodium.

Authors:  Fabio S Raman; Marcelo S Nacif; George Cater; Neville Gai; Jacquin Jones; Debiao Li; Christopher T Sibley; Songtao Liu; David A Bluemke
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 7.  Hepatobiliary contrast agents for contrast-enhanced MRI of the liver: properties, clinical development and applications.

Authors:  Peter Reimer; Günter Schneider; Wolfgang Schima
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-02-25       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Solid focal liver lesions: dynamic and late enhancement patterns with the dual phase contrast agent gadobenate dimeglumine.

Authors:  Luigi Grazioli; Maria Pia Bondioni; Niccolò Faccioli; Sebastiana Gambarini; Rita Tinti; Günther Schneider; Miles Kirchin
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2010-12

9.  T1 mapping of the myocardium: intra-individual assessment of post-contrast T1 time evolution and extracellular volume fraction at 3T for Gd-DTPA and Gd-BOPTA.

Authors:  Nadine Kawel; Marcelo Nacif; Anna Zavodni; Jacquin Jones; Songtao Liu; Christopher T Sibley; David A Bluemke
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 10.  Contrast agents for hepatic MRI.

Authors:  Giovanni Morana; Elisabetta Salviato; Alessandro Guarise
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.909

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.