The optimal use of contrast agents at high field MRI.

Eur Radiol 2006 Jun 1;16(6):1280-7. Epub 2006 Mar 1.

Center of Excellence High field MRI, Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Vienna, Medical School, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.

The intravenous administration of a standard dose of conventional gadolinium-based contrast agents produces higher contrast between the tumor and normal brain at 3.0 Tesla (T) than at 1.5 T, which allows reducing the dose to half of the standard one to produce similar contrast at 3.0 T compared to 1.5 T. The assessment of cumulative triple-dose 3.0 T images obtained the best results in the detection of brain metastases compared to other sequences. The contrast agent dose for dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging at 3.0 T can be reduced to 0.1 mmol compared to 0.2 mmol at 1.5 T due to the increased susceptibility effects at higher magnetic field strengths. Contrast agent application makes susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) at 3.0 T clinically attractive, with an increase in spatial resolution within the same scan time. Whereas a double dose of conventional gadolinium-based contrast agents was optimal in SWI with respect to sensitivity and image quality, a standard dose of gadobenate dimeglumine, which has a two-fold higher T1-relaxivity in blood, produced the same effect. For MR-arthrography, optimized concentrations of gadolinium-based contrast agents are similar at 3.0 and 1.5 T. In summary, high field MRI requires the optimization of the contrast agent dose in different clinical applications.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0154-0DOI Listing
June 2006
2 Reads

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

contrast agents
16
gadolinium-based contrast
12
contrast agent
12
field mri
8
dose conventional
8
high field
8
standard dose
8
conventional gadolinium-based
8
agent dose
8
contrast
8
dose
6
strengths contrast
4
field strengths
4
magnetic field
4
imaging swi
4
attractive increase
4
increase spatial
4
spatial resolution
4
clinically attractive
4
swi clinically
4

References

(Supplied by CrossRef)

R Frayne et al.
Invest Radiol 2003

H Schild et al.
Fortschr Röntgenstr 2005

MA Bernstein et al.
Magn Reson Med 2001

KR Thulborn et al.
Top Magn Reson Imag 1999

O Gonen et al.
AJNR 2001

S Hunsche et al.
Radiology 2001

PA Rinck et al.
Radiology 1988

ML Wood et al.
J Magn Reson Imaging 1993

MA Fernandez-Seara et al.
Magn Reson Med 2000

JP Wansapura et al.
J Magn Reson Imaging 1999

AD Elster et al.
AJNR 1994

Similar Publications