Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Dose optimization of contrast-enhanced carotid MR angiography


Unterweger, M; Froehlich, J M; Kubik-Huch, R A; Seifert, Burkhardt; Birrer, M; Huber, T; Otto, R (2005). Dose optimization of contrast-enhanced carotid MR angiography. European Radiology, 15(9):1797-1805.

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to compare the diagnostic performance of a single-contrast or a double-contrast dose of carotid contrast-enhanced MR angiography (MRA). One-hundred nineteen patients (mean age 65+/-14.4 years) underwent carotid contrast-enhanced MRA with a standardized protocol (repetition time/echo 3.73 ms/1.38 ms, flip-angle 25 degrees, acquisition-time 19 s, voxel size 1.2 x 1.2 x 0.9 mm3) on a 1.5-T scanner (Sonata, Siemens-Medical-Systems) using a neck phased-array coil. Contrast agent was administered intravenously at a rate of 3.0 ml/s, either as a single dose (n=57; 0.1 mmol/kg body weight) or as a double dose (n=62; 0.2 mmol/kg body weight) of meglumine gadoterate (0.5 M/l), followed by 30 ml saline. Qualitative image analysis was performed on maximum intensity projections using a five-point scale. Signal intensities were measured at three different vascular levels on both sides to assess the contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs). Image quality was rated as good or excellent in all cases. A double dose did not influence the efficacy of carotid enhancement (CNR single dose 69.12+/-19.8; CNR double dose 70.01+/-20.7; p = 0.81) compared with a single dose. In both dose groups the mean CNRs were inversely related to bodyweight, despite adjusted contrast volumes (p=0.0005). Double-dose contrast-enhanced carotid MRA is not superior to single-dose MRA, as overall diagnostic performance and quantitative contrast enhancement are equal. Being more cost-efficient, a single-dose administration of contrast agent is recommended for MRA of the carotid arteries.

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to compare the diagnostic performance of a single-contrast or a double-contrast dose of carotid contrast-enhanced MR angiography (MRA). One-hundred nineteen patients (mean age 65+/-14.4 years) underwent carotid contrast-enhanced MRA with a standardized protocol (repetition time/echo 3.73 ms/1.38 ms, flip-angle 25 degrees, acquisition-time 19 s, voxel size 1.2 x 1.2 x 0.9 mm3) on a 1.5-T scanner (Sonata, Siemens-Medical-Systems) using a neck phased-array coil. Contrast agent was administered intravenously at a rate of 3.0 ml/s, either as a single dose (n=57; 0.1 mmol/kg body weight) or as a double dose (n=62; 0.2 mmol/kg body weight) of meglumine gadoterate (0.5 M/l), followed by 30 ml saline. Qualitative image analysis was performed on maximum intensity projections using a five-point scale. Signal intensities were measured at three different vascular levels on both sides to assess the contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs). Image quality was rated as good or excellent in all cases. A double dose did not influence the efficacy of carotid enhancement (CNR single dose 69.12+/-19.8; CNR double dose 70.01+/-20.7; p = 0.81) compared with a single dose. In both dose groups the mean CNRs were inversely related to bodyweight, despite adjusted contrast volumes (p=0.0005). Double-dose contrast-enhanced carotid MRA is not superior to single-dose MRA, as overall diagnostic performance and quantitative contrast enhancement are equal. Being more cost-efficient, a single-dose administration of contrast agent is recommended for MRA of the carotid arteries.

Statistics

Citations

9 citations in Web of Science®
12 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 10 Jun 2009
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI)
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2005
Deposited On:10 Jun 2009 10:27
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 13:15
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0938-7994
Additional Information:The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-2756-3
PubMed ID:15875194

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 1MB
View at publisher