OBJECTIVE: To prove that 1.0 M gadobutrol provides superior contrast enhancement in suspicion of osteomyelitis of the feet compared with 0.5 M gadoterate. METHODS: MRI of feet was performed on 2 separate occasions. Independent injections of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadoterate at doses of 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight were administered per patient. The interval between the two MR examinations was between 24 h and 7 days. Evaluation was performed in an off-site blinded read. RESULTS:41 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. Results of secondary efficacy variables did not show statistically significant differences. For the primary efficacy variable, a trend in favour of gadobutrol was seen in the full analysis set (ITT) population resulting in at least non-inferiority. In the per protocol (PP) analysis set gadobutrol had better contrast than gadoterate (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p = 0.0466). CONCLUSION: Imaging of the distal lower limb in this special patient population requires a large number of patients to obtain enough comparative images where non-contrast-agent-dependent factors do not disturb contrast agent efficacy. The ITT analysis showed at least non-inferiority of gadobutrol in comparison to gadoterate. The avoidance of imaging artefacts demonstrates a better outcome for gadobutrol.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To prove that 1.0 M gadobutrol provides superior contrast enhancement in suspicion of osteomyelitis of the feet compared with 0.5 M gadoterate. METHODS: MRI of feet was performed on 2 separate occasions. Independent injections of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadoterate at doses of 0.1 mmol Gd/kg body weight were administered per patient. The interval between the two MR examinations was between 24 h and 7 days. Evaluation was performed in an off-site blinded read. RESULTS: 41 patients were eligible for efficacy analysis. Results of secondary efficacy variables did not show statistically significant differences. For the primary efficacy variable, a trend in favour of gadobutrol was seen in the full analysis set (ITT) population resulting in at least non-inferiority. In the per protocol (PP) analysis set gadobutrol had better contrast than gadoterate (Wilcoxon signed rank test, p = 0.0466). CONCLUSION: Imaging of the distal lower limb in this special patient population requires a large number of patients to obtain enough comparative images where non-contrast-agent-dependent factors do not disturb contrast agent efficacy. The ITT analysis showed at least non-inferiority of gadobutrol in comparison to gadoterate. The avoidance of imaging artefacts demonstrates a better outcome for gadobutrol.
Authors: H Vogler; J Platzek; G Schuhmann-Giampieri; T Frenzel; H J Weinmann; B Radüchel; W R Press Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 1995-11 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Annette Hentsch; Manuela A Aschauer; Jörn O Balzer; Joachim Brossmann; Hans P Busch; Kirsten Davis; Philippe Douek; Franz Ebner; Jos M A van Engelshoven; Michaela Gregor; Christian Kersting; Patrick R Knüsel; Edward Leen; Tim Leiner; Christian Loewe; Simon McPherson; Peter Reimer; Fritz K W Schäfer; Matthias Taupitz; Siegfried A Thurnher; Bernd Tombach; Robin Wegener; Dominik Weishaupt; James F M Meaney Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-03-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Alexander Huppertz; Thomas Balzer; Anthony Blakeborough; Josy Breuer; Andrea Giovagnoni; Gertraud Heinz-Peer; Michael Laniado; Riccardo M Manfredi; Didier G Mathieu; Dieter Mueller; Peter Reimer; Philip J Robinson; Michael Strotzer; Matthias Taupitz; Thomas J Vogl Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ulrike I Attenberger; Val M Runge; Carney B Jackson; Shannon Baumann; Krista Birkemeier; Henrik J Michaely; Stefan O Schoenberg; Maximilian F Reiser; Bernd J Wintersperger Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Philip Hoelter; Stefan Lang; Marina Weibart; Manuel Schmidt; Michael F X Knott; Tobias Engelhorn; Marco Essig; Stephan Kloska; Arnd Doerfler Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 2.804