BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Gadobenate dimeglumine has proved advantageous compared with other gadolinium-based contrast agents for contrast-enhanced brain MR imaging. Gadobutrol is a more highly concentrated agent (1.0 mol/L). This study intraindividually compared 0.1-mmol/kg doses of these agents for qualitative and quantitative evaluation of brain tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients with suspected or known brain tumors underwent 2 identical MR imaging examinations at 1.5T, 1 withgadobenate dimeglumineand the other with gadobutrol, both at a dose of 0.1-mmol/kg body weight. The agents were injected in randomized order separated by 3-14 days. Imaging sequences and acquisition timing were identical for the 2 examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images qualitatively for diagnostic information (lesion extent, delineation, morphology, enhancement, global preference) and quantitatively for CNR and LBR. RESULTS:One hundred fourteen of 123 enrolled patients successfully underwent both examinations. Final diagnoses were intra-axial tumors, metastases, extra-axial tumors, "other" tumors, and "nontumor" (49, 46, 8, 7, and 4 subjects, respectively). Readers 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated preference for gadobenate dimeglumine in 46 (40.7%), 54 (47.4%), and 49 (43.0%) patients, respectively, compared with 6, 7, and 7 patients for gadobutrol (P < .0001, all readers). Highly significant (P < .0001, all readers) preference for gadobenate dimeglumine was demonstrated for all other qualitative end points. Inter-reader agreement was good for all evaluations (κ = 0.414-0.629). Significantly superior CNR and LBR were determined for gadobenate dimeglumine (P < .019, all readers). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly greater morphologic information and lesion enhancement are achieved on brain MR imaging with 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine compared with gadobutrol at an equivalent dose.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Gadobenate dimeglumine has proved advantageous compared with other gadolinium-based contrast agents for contrast-enhanced brain MR imaging. Gadobutrol is a more highly concentrated agent (1.0 mol/L). This study intraindividually compared 0.1-mmol/kg doses of these agents for qualitative and quantitative evaluation of brain tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients with suspected or known brain tumors underwent 2 identical MR imaging examinations at 1.5T, 1 with gadobenate dimeglumine and the other with gadobutrol, both at a dose of 0.1-mmol/kg body weight. The agents were injected in randomized order separated by 3-14 days. Imaging sequences and acquisition timing were identical for the 2 examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images qualitatively for diagnostic information (lesion extent, delineation, morphology, enhancement, global preference) and quantitatively for CNR and LBR. RESULTS: One hundred fourteen of 123 enrolled patients successfully underwent both examinations. Final diagnoses were intra-axial tumors, metastases, extra-axial tumors, "other" tumors, and "nontumor" (49, 46, 8, 7, and 4 subjects, respectively). Readers 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated preference for gadobenate dimeglumine in 46 (40.7%), 54 (47.4%), and 49 (43.0%) patients, respectively, compared with 6, 7, and 7 patients for gadobutrol (P < .0001, all readers). Highly significant (P < .0001, all readers) preference for gadobenate dimeglumine was demonstrated for all other qualitative end points. Inter-reader agreement was good for all evaluations (κ = 0.414-0.629). Significantly superior CNR and LBR were determined for gadobenate dimeglumine (P < .019, all readers). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly greater morphologic information and lesion enhancement are achieved on brain MR imaging with 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine compared with gadobutrol at an equivalent dose.
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: Kenneth R Maravilla; Joseph A Maldjian; Ilona M Schmalfuss; Matthew J Kuhn; Brian C Bowen; Franz J Wippold; Val M Runge; Michael V Knopp; Stephane Kremer; Leo J Wolansky; Nicoletta Anzalone; Marco Essig; Lars Gustafsson Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-06-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Laura Martincich; Matthieu Faivre-Pierret; Christian M Zechmann; Stefano Corcione; Harrie C M van den Bosch; Wei-Jun Peng; Antonella Petrillo; Katja C Siegmann; Johannes T Heverhagen; Pietro Panizza; Hans-Björn Gehl; Felix Diekmann; Federica Pediconi; Lin Ma; Fiona J Gilbert; Francesco Sardanelli; Paolo Belli; Marco Salvatore; Karl-Friedrich Kreitner; Claudia M Weiss; Chiara Zuiani Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-12-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Zoran Rumboldt; Howard A Rowley; Fred Steinberg; Joseph A Maldjian; Jordi Ruscalleda; Lars Gustafsson; Stefano Bastianello Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: M Vaneckova; M Herman; M P Smith; M Mechl; K R Maravilla; J Weichet; M V Spampinato; J Žižka; F J Wippold; J J Baima; R Babbel; E Bültmann; R Y Huang; J-H Buhk; A Bonafé; C Colosimo; S Lui; M A Kirchin; N Shen; G Pirovano; A Spinazzi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Yanjun Li; X Li; D Li; J Lu; X Xing; F Yan; Yuan Li; X Wang; R Iezzi; F De Cobelli Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jens Harald Kramer; Elisabeth Arnoldi; Christopher J François; Andrew L Wentland; Konstantin Nikolaou; Bernd J Wintersperger; Thomas M Grist Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: K R Maravilla; M P Smith; J Vymazal; M Goyal; M Herman; J J Baima; R Babbel; M Vaneckova; J Žižka; C Colosimo; M Urbańczyk-Zawadzka; M Mechl; A K Bag; S Bastianello; E Bueltmann; T Hirai; T Frattini; M A Kirchin; G Pirovano Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Mark C DeLano; Maria Vittoria Spampinato; Eric Y Chang; Richard G Barr; Richard J Lichtenstein; Cesare Colosimo; Josef Vymazal; Zhibo Wen; Doris D M Lin; Miles A Kirchin; Gianpaolo Pirovano Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 5.119