Background: The utility of gadobutrol (GAD) which is higher r1 value contrast media for evaluating abdominal solid organ have not been fully evaluated.
Objective: To compare the contrast enhancement of abdominal organs on dynamic MRI using 0.1 mmol/kg 1.0 M GAD or 0.5 M meglumine gadoterate (MG) in patients with a liver hemangioma.
Methods: A phantom study was performed at different concentrations (0.05, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9, 1.0, 5.0 and 10 mmol/L) of GAD and MG. Sixty-two patients with a liver hemangioma were enrolled. Contrast media was injected at a rate of 2 mL/s followed by 40 mL of saline. Two arterial phases, a portal phase and an equilibrium phase were obtained. One certified radiologist set regions of interest on the abdominal aorta, liver, pancreas, spleen and the liver hemangioma. The relative enhancement ratio (RER) was calculated.
Results: In the phantom study the signal intensity of both contrast media was similar at lower concentrations. However, the signal intensity of MG was higher at concentrations of more than 5.0 mmol/L. In the clinical study the RER of the abdominal viscera during the portal and equilibrium phases was higher with GAD. The hemangioma had a higher equilibrium phase enhancement with GAD. The aortic RER was equivalent during all phases and the liver RER during the 2nd arterial phase was higher with GAD. The arterial phase during GAD imaging might have been measured later than was optimal.
Conclusion: When the same injection protocol was used for an abdominal dynamic MRI, arterial phase imaging was late when GAD was used. The higher T1 relaxation value was significantly higher in the abdominal viscera during the portal and equilibrium phases, while the liver hemangioma also had significantly higher contrast enhancement during the equilibrium phase. Clinical trial registration number: 3186.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.08.003] [PMID: 25172427]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23934] [PMID: 23677890]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e318198a0ae] [PMID: 19169143]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000039] [PMID: 24637587]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000184756.66360.d3] [PMID: 16230904]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.219.3.r01jn45699] [PMID: 11376257]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25925] [PMID: 29247585]