Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Time‐resolved contrast‐enhanced three‐dimensional pulmonary MR‐angiography: 1.0 M gadobutrol vs. 0.5 M gadopentetate dimeglumine

2004; Wiley; Volume: 19; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/jmri.10452

1522-2586

Christian Fink, Michael Bock, Fabian Kießling, Matthias P. Lichy, Radko Krissak, I. Zuna, Astrid Schmähl, Stefan Delorme, Hans‐Ulrich Kauczor,

Lanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes

Abstract Purpose To compare contrast characteristics and image quality of 1.0 M gadobutrol with 0.5 M Gd‐DTPA for time‐resolved three‐dimensional pulmonary magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). Materials and Methods Thirty‐one patients and five healthy volunteers were examined with a contrast‐enhanced time‐resolved pulmonary MRA protocol (fast low‐angle shot [FLASH] three‐dimensional, TR/TE = 2.2/1.0 msec, flip angle: 25°, scan time per three‐dimensional data set = 5.6 seconds). Patients were randomized to receive either 0.1 mmol/kg body weight (bw) or 0.2 mmol/kg bw gadobutrol, or 0.2 mmol/kg bw Gd‐DTPA. Volunteers were examined three times, twice with 0.2 mmol/kg bw gadobutrol using two different flip angles and once with 0.2 mmol/kg bw Gd‐DTPA. All contrast injections were performed at a rate of 5 mL/second. Image analysis included signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) and contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) measurements in lung arteries and veins, as well as a subjective analysis of image quality. Results In patients, significantly higher SNR and CNR were observed with Gd‐DTPA compared to both doses of gadobutrol (SNR: 35–42 vs.17–25; CNR 33–39 vs. 16–23; P ≤ 0.05). No relevant differences were observed between 0.1 mmol/kg bw and 0.2 mmol/kg bw gadobutrol. In volunteers, gadobutrol and Gd‐DTPA achieved similar SNR and CNR. A significantly higher SNR and CNR was observed for gadobutrol‐enhanced MRA with an increased flip angle of 40°. Image quality was rated equal for both contrast agents. Conclusion No relevant advantages of 1.0 M gadobutrol over 0.5 M Gd‐DTPA were observed for time‐resolved pulmonary MRA in this study. Potential explanations are T2/T2*‐effects caused by the high intravascular concentration when using high injection rates. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004;19:202–208. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.