• H von Tengg-Kobligk, F Floemer, and M V Knopp.
• Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1228, USA. von.tengg.1@osu.edu
• Radiologe. 2003 Feb 1; 43 (2): 171-8.

QuestionThe availability of new MR contrast agents having either a protein binding effect or higher concentration leads to the question if they differ from standard compounds in their vascular contrasting properties.MethodsBy intraindividual comparison five volunteers were examined (1.5 T MR system) with a multi-phasic MRA of the abdomen each receiving three different contrast agents (gadopentetate dimeglumine 0.5 M; gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M, and gadobutrol 1.0 M). The dose (0.15 mmol/kg body weight) and flow rate (3.0 ml/s) were kept identical. All images were quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated by blinded assessment.ResultsSignificantly higher maximum signal intensity was found in the arteries for the protein interacting gadobenate dimeglumine (p = 0.05). No significant difference in vascular enhancement was demonstrated in the comparison of gadobutrol to gadopentetate dimeglumine.ConclusionGadobenate dimeglumine was shown to be a favorable contrast agent for multi-phasic MRA. A higher concentrated Gd-chelate does not automatically lead to improved vascular contrast if standard imaging protocols are used.

22 keywords...

hide…