S Dehkharghani1, J Kang, A M Saindane. 1. From Neuroradiology Division, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences (S.D., A.M.S.), Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Time-resolved MRA with the use of bolus injection of paramagnetic agents has proved valuable in neurovascular imaging. Standard contrast agents have limited blood-pool residence times, motivating the development of highly protein-bound blood-pool agents with greater relaxivity and longer intravascular residence, affording improved image quality at lesser doses. This study represents the first comparison of blood-pool agents to standard agents in time-resolved cerebral MRA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred datasets were acquired at 1.5 T by use of a standardized, time-resolved MRA protocol. Patients received either unit dosing of a standard extracellular agent at 0.1 mmol/kg or a blood-pool agent at 0.03 mmol/kg. Peak arterial and venous enhancement phases were identified and subsequently scored qualitatively by use of a 4-point Likert scale, with attention to 6 vascular segments: 1) intracranial ICA; 2) MCA M1; 3) MCA M2; 4) MCA M3; 5) deep cerebral veins; and 6) dural venous sinuses. RESULTS: Fifty MR angiographies were acquired with each agent. No significant differences were found between agents in generation of uncontaminated arteriograms. Blood-pool agents, at 67% dose reduction, were of significantly greater quality across most vascular segments, including ICA (P = .019), M2 (P = .003), and M3 (P < .01). Superiority in the M1 segment approached significance (P = .059). Significantly better venographic quality was noted for deep venous structures (P = .016) with the use of blood-pool agents. CONCLUSIONS: Blood-pool agents provide superior demonstration of most intracranial vessels in time-resolved MRA compared with standard agents, at reduced doses. The greater relaxation enhancement and more favorable dosing profile make blood-pool agents superior to standard agents for use in cerebral time-resolved MRA.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Time-resolved MRA with the use of bolus injection of paramagnetic agents has proved valuable in neurovascular imaging. Standard contrast agents have limited blood-pool residence times, motivating the development of highly protein-bound blood-pool agents with greater relaxivity and longer intravascular residence, affording improved image quality at lesser doses. This study represents the first comparison of blood-pool agents to standard agents in time-resolved cerebral MRA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred datasets were acquired at 1.5 T by use of a standardized, time-resolved MRA protocol. Patients received either unit dosing of a standard extracellular agent at 0.1 mmol/kg or a blood-pool agent at 0.03 mmol/kg. Peak arterial and venous enhancement phases were identified and subsequently scored qualitatively by use of a 4-point Likert scale, with attention to 6 vascular segments: 1) intracranial ICA; 2) MCA M1; 3) MCA M2; 4) MCA M3; 5) deep cerebral veins; and 6) dural venous sinuses. RESULTS: Fifty MR angiographies were acquired with each agent. No significant differences were found between agents in generation of uncontaminated arteriograms. Blood-pool agents, at 67% dose reduction, were of significantly greater quality across most vascular segments, including ICA (P = .019), M2 (P = .003), and M3 (P < .01). Superiority in the M1 segment approached significance (P = .059). Significantly better venographic quality was noted for deep venous structures (P = .016) with the use of blood-pool agents. CONCLUSIONS: Blood-pool agents provide superior demonstration of most intracranial vessels in time-resolved MRA compared with standard agents, at reduced doses. The greater relaxation enhancement and more favorable dosing profile make blood-pool agents superior to standard agents for use in cerebral time-resolved MRA.
Authors: Scott B Reeder; Bernd J Wintersperger; Olaf Dietrich; Titus Lanz; Andreas Greiser; Maximilian F Reiser; Gary M Glazer; Stefan O Schoenberg Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Martin Rohrer; Hans Bauer; Jan Mintorovitch; Martin Requardt; Hanns-Joachim Weinmann Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Henrik J Michaely; Harald Kramer; Olaf Dietrich; Kambiz Nael; Klaus-Peter Lodemann; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg Journal: Radiology Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R P Lim; M Shapiro; E Y Wang; M Law; J S Babb; L E Rueff; J S Jacob; S Kim; R H Carson; T P Mulholland; G Laub; E M Hecht Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-09-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Winfried A Willinek; Dariusch R Hadizadeh; Marcus von Falkenhausen; Horst Urbach; R Hoogeveen; Hans H Schild; Jürgen Gieseke Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.813