[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The objective of the PREDICT (patients with renal impairment and diabetes undergoing computed tomography) study was to compare the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) after administration of low-osmolar (iopamidol 370, 796 mOsm/kg) or isoosmolar (iodixanol 320, 290 mOsm/kg) contrast medium in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease undergoing CT.
Two hundred sixty-three patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate [GFR] = 20-59 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) and diabetes mellitus were randomized to receive at least 65 mL of iopamidol 370 or iodixanol 320 for a CT procedure. Serum creatinine levels were measured at baseline and 48-72 hours after contrast administration. CIN was defined as an increase in the serum creatinine level after contrast administration of >or= 25% from the baseline level. The incidence of CIN in the total study population and the incidence of CIN in patients at increased risk for CIN were compared using Fisher's exact test.
Two hundred forty-eight patients were included in the CIN analysis: 125 receiving iopamidol 370 and 123 receiving iodixanol 320. Study population demographics were comparable, as was baseline renal function (estimated GFR = 47.6 mL/min/1.73 m(2) for the iopamidol 370 group vs 49.9 mL/min/1.73 m(2) for the iodixanol 320 group; p = 0.16). Increases in the serum creatinine value of >or= 25% occurred in seven patients (5.6%) receiving iopamidol 370 and in six patients (4.9%) receiving iodixanol 320 (95% CI, -4.8% to 6.3%; p = 1.0). The mean serum creatinine change from the baseline level was 0.04 mg/dL in both groups (analysis of covariance, p = 0.80). In patients with a baseline serum creatinine value of >or= 2.0 mg/dL, baseline estimated GFR of <or= 40 mL/min/1.73 m(2), or those receiving > 140 mL of contrast medium, the incidence of CIN was low and comparable between the two study groups (p = 1.0 in all instances).
The incidence of CIN in patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease receiving IV contrast medium was not significantly different after CT using iopamidol 370 or iodixanol 320.
American Journal of Roentgenology 07/2008; 191(1):151-7. · 2.90 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The higher relaxivity of gadobenate dimeglumine compared with gadodiamide is potentially advantageous for contrast-enhanced brain MR imaging. This study intraindividually compared 0.1-mmol/kg doses of these agents for qualitative and quantitative lesion enhancement.
Adult patients with suggested or known brain lesions underwent 2 identical MR imaging examinations at 1.5T, one with gadobenate dimeglumine and the other with gadodiamide. The agents were administered in randomized order separated by 3-14 days. Imaging sequences and postinjection acquisition timing were identical for the 2 examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images qualitatively for diagnostic information (lesion extent, delineation, morphology, enhancement, and global preference) and quantitatively for contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR).
One hundred thirteen of 138 enrolled patients successfully underwent both examinations. Final diagnoses were intra-axial tumor, metastasis, extra-axial tumor, or other (47, 27, 18, and 21 subjects, respectively). Readers 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated global preference for gadobenate dimeglumine in 63 (55.8%), 77 (68.1%), and 73 (64.6%) patients, respectively, compared with 3, 2, and 3 patients for gadodiamide (P < .0001, all readers). Highly significant (P < .0001, all readers) preference for gadobenate dimeglumine was demonstrated for all qualitative end points and for CNR (increases of 23.3%-34.7% and 42.4%-48.9% [spin-echo and gradient-refocused echo sequences, respectively] for gadobenate dimeglumine compared with gadodiamide). Inter-reader agreement was good for all evaluations (kappa = 0.47-0.69). Significant preference for gadobenate dimeglumine was demonstrated for all lesion subgroup analyses.
Significantly greater diagnostic information and lesion enhancement are achieved on brain MR imaging with 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine compared with gadodiamide at an equivalent dose.
American Journal of Neuroradiology 07/2008; 29(9):1684-91. · 3.17 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The goal in this article was to compare 0.1 mmol/kg doses of gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) and gadopentetate dimeglumine, also known as gadolinium diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-DTPA), for enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of intraaxial brain tumors.
Eighty-four patients with either intraaxial glioma (47 patients) or metastasis (37 patients) underwent two MR imaging examinations at 1.5 tesla, one with Gd-BOPTA as the contrast agent and the other with Gd-DTPA. The interval between fully randomized contrast medium administrations was 2 to 7 days. The T1-weighted spin echo and T2-weighted fast spin echo images were acquired before administration of contrast agents and T1-weighted spin echo images were obtained after the agents were administered. Acquisition parameters and postinjection acquisition times were identical for the two examinations in each patient. Three experienced readers working in a fully blinded fashion independently evaluated all images for degree and quality of available information (lesion contrast enhancement, lesion border delineation, definition of disease extent, visualization of the lesion's internal structures, global diagnostic preference) and quantitative enhancement (that is, the extent of lesion enhancement after contrast agent administration compared with that seen before its administration [hereafter referred to as percent enhancement], lesion/brain ratio, and contrast/noise ratio). Differences were tested with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Reader agreement was assessed using kappa statistics. Significantly better diagnostic information/imaging performance (p < 0.0001, all readers) was obtained with Gd-BOPTA for all visualization end points. Global preference for images obtained with Gd-BOPTA was expressed for 42 (50%), 52 (61.9%), and 56 (66.7%) of 84 patients (readers 1, 2, and 3, respectively) compared with images obtained with Gd-DTPA contrast in four (4.8%), six (7.1%), and three (3.6%) of 84 patients. Similar differences were noted for all other visualization end points. Significantly greater quantitative contrast enhancement (p < 0.04) was noted after administration of Gd-BOPTA. Reader agreement was good (kappa > 0.4).
Lesion visualization, delineation, definition, and contrast enhancement are significantly better after administration of 0.1 mmol/kg Gd-BOPTA, potentially allowing better surgical planning and follow up and improved disease management.
Journal of Neurosurgery 04/2007; 106(4):557-66. · 3.15 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To prospectively compare gadobenate dimeglumine with gadopentetate dimeglumine (0.1 mmol per kilogram body weight) for enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of central nervous system (CNS) lesions.
This study was HIPAA-compliant at U.S. centers and was conducted at all centers according to the Good Clinical Practice standard. Institutional review board and regulatory approval were granted; written informed consent was obtained. Seventy-nine men and 78 women (mean age, 50.5 years +/- 14.4 [standard deviation]) were randomized to group A (n = 78) or B (n = 79). Patients underwent two temporally separated 1.5-T MR imaging examinations. In randomized order, gadobenate followed by gadopentetate was administered in group A; order of administration was reversed in group B. Contrast agent administration (volume, speed of injection), imaging parameters before and after injection, and time between injections and postinjection acquisitions were identical for both examinations. Three blinded neuroradiologists evaluated images by using objective image interpretation criteria for diagnostic information end points (lesion border delineation, definition of disease extent, visualization of internal morphologic features of the lesion, enhancement of the lesion) and quantitative parameters (percentage of lesion enhancement, contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR]). Overall diagnostic preference in terms of lesion conspicuity, detectability, and diagnostic confidence was assessed. Between-group comparisons were performed with Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Readers 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated overall preference for gadobenate in 75, 89, and 103 patients, compared with that for gadopentetate in seven, 10, and six patients, respectively (P < .0001). Significant (P < .0001) preference for gadobenate was demonstrated for diagnostic information end points, percentage of lesion enhancement, and CNR. Superiority of gadobenate was significant (P < .001) in patients with intraaxial and extraaxial lesions.
Gadobenate compared with gadopentetate at an equivalent dose provides significantly better enhancement and diagnostic information for CNS MR imaging.