OBJECTIVE: We qualitatively and quantitatively compared MRI enhancement obtained with gadofosveset, an albumin-binding blood-pool contrast agent, and with gadobutrol, an extracellular contrast agent, in patients with glioblastoma. METHODS: Thirty-five patients (25 men; 64 ± 14 years) with histologically proven glioblastoma underwent MRI including pre- and post-contrast T1-weighted SE images acquired 5 min after gadobutrol (0.1 mmol/kg) and, 48 h later, images acquired with identical parameters 5 min and 3, 6, and 24 h after gadofosveset (0.03 mmol/kg). Lesion extent, delineation, internal morphology, multifocality, and global diagnostic preference were evaluated quantitatively for the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and contrast enhancement (CE). RESULTS: Mean values of SNR, CNR, and tumour CE were highest 6 h after gadofosveset. Multifocality was seen in 17 (48.6 %) patients; additional lesions had stronger enhancement 6 h after gadofosveset in 12 patients (70.6 %). In 21 (60 %) patients, radiologists' global preference was highest in images acquired 6 h after gadofosveset (kappa = 0.764). In 22 patients (62.8 %), all qualitative endpoints were better at 5 min after gadobutrol than in images acquired 5 min after gadofosveset injection. CONCLUSIONS: Gadobutrol gives significant tumour enhancement in early postcontrast imaging. However, images acquired 6 h after gadofosveset injection have significantly better diagnostic information endpoints and contrast enhancement.
OBJECTIVE: We qualitatively and quantitatively compared MRI enhancement obtained with gadofosveset, an albumin-binding blood-pool contrast agent, and with gadobutrol, an extracellular contrast agent, in patients with glioblastoma. METHODS: Thirty-five patients (25 men; 64 ± 14 years) with histologically proven glioblastoma underwent MRI including pre- and post-contrast T1-weighted SE images acquired 5 min after gadobutrol (0.1 mmol/kg) and, 48 h later, images acquired with identical parameters 5 min and 3, 6, and 24 h after gadofosveset (0.03 mmol/kg). Lesion extent, delineation, internal morphology, multifocality, and global diagnostic preference were evaluated quantitatively for the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and contrast enhancement (CE). RESULTS: Mean values of SNR, CNR, and tumour CE were highest 6 h after gadofosveset. Multifocality was seen in 17 (48.6 %) patients; additional lesions had stronger enhancement 6 h after gadofosveset in 12 patients (70.6 %). In 21 (60 %) patients, radiologists' global preference was highest in images acquired 6 h after gadofosveset (kappa = 0.764). In 22 patients (62.8 %), all qualitative endpoints were better at 5 min after gadobutrol than in images acquired 5 min after gadofosveset injection. CONCLUSIONS:Gadobutrol gives significant tumour enhancement in early postcontrast imaging. However, images acquired 6 h after gadofosveset injection have significantly better diagnostic information endpoints and contrast enhancement.
Authors: Kofi Adzamli; Dmitriy A Yablonskiy; Michael R Chicoine; Eun Kyung Won; Karen P Galen; Michael C Zahner; Thomas A Woolsey; Joseph J H Ackerman Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 4.668
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: Marco Essig; Marc-André Weber; Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk; Michael V Knopp; William T C Yuh; Frederik L Giesel Journal: Top Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-04
Authors: James G Smirniotopoulos; Frances M Murphy; Elizabeth J Rushing; John H Rees; Jason W Schroeder Journal: Radiographics Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Marco Essig; Martin Rohrer; Frederik Giesel; Jochen Tüttenberg; Marc-André Weber; Hendrik Michaely; Lars Gerigk; Matthias Voth Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-08-12 Impact factor: 5.315
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: E Gianolio; C Cabella; S Colombo Serra; G Valbusa; F Arena; A Maiocchi; L Miragoli; F Tedoldi; F Uggeri; M Visigalli; P Bardini; S Aime Journal: J Biol Inorg Chem Date: 2014-02-08 Impact factor: 3.358
Authors: Bart R J van Dijken; Peter Jan van Laar; Marion Smits; Jan Willem Dankbaar; Roelien H Enting; Anouk van der Hoorn Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Owen C Richardson; Octavia Bane; Marietta L J Scott; Steven F Tanner; John C Waterton; Steven P Sourbron; Timothy J Carroll; David L Buckley Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-02-11 Impact factor: 4.668