Comparison of Dynamic Phase Enhancement of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine

Temel Tirkes, Peter Mehta, Alex M. Aisen, Chandana Lall, Fatih Akisik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective To determine the differences in enhancement of hepatocellular carcinoma during the first 5 minutes of postcontrast phases with gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) vs gadobenate dimeglumine. Methods Ninety-five cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were examined on a 1.5-T scanner: 74 patients with Gd-BOPTA and 21 patients with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Same magnetic resonance imaging parameters were used for both groups. Gadoxetate isodium was administered at a dose of 0.025 mmol/kg; and Gd-BOPTA, at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. Results Mean contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were similar in arterial (P = 0.3), portal venous (P = 0.1), and 5-minute delayed phases (P = 0.73). The CNRs of lesions in the Gd-EOB-DTPA group were lower in arterial phase, although this did not reach statistical significance. The CNRs of Gd-EOB-DTPA during the equilibrium phase was higher (P = 0.006). Conclusions Gadoxetate isodium resulted in lower CNR during the arterial phase and higher CNR during the portal venous, equilibrium, and 5-minute delayed phases compared with gadobenate dimeglumine using the Food and Drug Administration-approved doses; however, overall, there was no statistical significance (P = 0.077).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)479-482
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Computer Assisted Tomography
Volume39
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 29 2015

Fingerprint

Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Noise
United States Food and Drug Administration
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
gadobenic acid
gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA

Keywords

  • contrast
  • gadobenate dimeglumine
  • gadoxetate disodium
  • hepatocellular carcinoma
  • magnetic resonance imaging

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Comparison of Dynamic Phase Enhancement of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine. / Tirkes, Temel; Mehta, Peter; Aisen, Alex M.; Lall, Chandana; Akisik, Fatih.

In: Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, Vol. 39, No. 4, 29.07.2015, p. 479-482.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9c7cc536b06f4dd08b92d924955d18fc,
title = "Comparison of Dynamic Phase Enhancement of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine",
abstract = "Objective To determine the differences in enhancement of hepatocellular carcinoma during the first 5 minutes of postcontrast phases with gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) vs gadobenate dimeglumine. Methods Ninety-five cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were examined on a 1.5-T scanner: 74 patients with Gd-BOPTA and 21 patients with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Same magnetic resonance imaging parameters were used for both groups. Gadoxetate isodium was administered at a dose of 0.025 mmol/kg; and Gd-BOPTA, at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. Results Mean contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were similar in arterial (P = 0.3), portal venous (P = 0.1), and 5-minute delayed phases (P = 0.73). The CNRs of lesions in the Gd-EOB-DTPA group were lower in arterial phase, although this did not reach statistical significance. The CNRs of Gd-EOB-DTPA during the equilibrium phase was higher (P = 0.006). Conclusions Gadoxetate isodium resulted in lower CNR during the arterial phase and higher CNR during the portal venous, equilibrium, and 5-minute delayed phases compared with gadobenate dimeglumine using the Food and Drug Administration-approved doses; however, overall, there was no statistical significance (P = 0.077).",
keywords = "contrast, gadobenate dimeglumine, gadoxetate disodium, hepatocellular carcinoma, magnetic resonance imaging",
author = "Temel Tirkes and Peter Mehta and Aisen, {Alex M.} and Chandana Lall and Fatih Akisik",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "29",
doi = "10.1097/RCT.0000000000000234",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "479--482",
journal = "Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography",
issn = "0363-8715",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Dynamic Phase Enhancement of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Gadoxetate Disodium vs Gadobenate Dimeglumine

AU - Tirkes, Temel

AU - Mehta, Peter

AU - Aisen, Alex M.

AU - Lall, Chandana

AU - Akisik, Fatih

PY - 2015/7/29

Y1 - 2015/7/29

N2 - Objective To determine the differences in enhancement of hepatocellular carcinoma during the first 5 minutes of postcontrast phases with gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) vs gadobenate dimeglumine. Methods Ninety-five cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were examined on a 1.5-T scanner: 74 patients with Gd-BOPTA and 21 patients with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Same magnetic resonance imaging parameters were used for both groups. Gadoxetate isodium was administered at a dose of 0.025 mmol/kg; and Gd-BOPTA, at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. Results Mean contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were similar in arterial (P = 0.3), portal venous (P = 0.1), and 5-minute delayed phases (P = 0.73). The CNRs of lesions in the Gd-EOB-DTPA group were lower in arterial phase, although this did not reach statistical significance. The CNRs of Gd-EOB-DTPA during the equilibrium phase was higher (P = 0.006). Conclusions Gadoxetate isodium resulted in lower CNR during the arterial phase and higher CNR during the portal venous, equilibrium, and 5-minute delayed phases compared with gadobenate dimeglumine using the Food and Drug Administration-approved doses; however, overall, there was no statistical significance (P = 0.077).

AB - Objective To determine the differences in enhancement of hepatocellular carcinoma during the first 5 minutes of postcontrast phases with gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) vs gadobenate dimeglumine. Methods Ninety-five cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were examined on a 1.5-T scanner: 74 patients with Gd-BOPTA and 21 patients with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Same magnetic resonance imaging parameters were used for both groups. Gadoxetate isodium was administered at a dose of 0.025 mmol/kg; and Gd-BOPTA, at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. Results Mean contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were similar in arterial (P = 0.3), portal venous (P = 0.1), and 5-minute delayed phases (P = 0.73). The CNRs of lesions in the Gd-EOB-DTPA group were lower in arterial phase, although this did not reach statistical significance. The CNRs of Gd-EOB-DTPA during the equilibrium phase was higher (P = 0.006). Conclusions Gadoxetate isodium resulted in lower CNR during the arterial phase and higher CNR during the portal venous, equilibrium, and 5-minute delayed phases compared with gadobenate dimeglumine using the Food and Drug Administration-approved doses; however, overall, there was no statistical significance (P = 0.077).

KW - contrast

KW - gadobenate dimeglumine

KW - gadoxetate disodium

KW - hepatocellular carcinoma

KW - magnetic resonance imaging

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938057869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938057869&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000234

DO - 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000234

M3 - Article

C2 - 25783800

AN - SCOPUS:84938057869

VL - 39

SP - 479

EP - 482

JO - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

JF - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

SN - 0363-8715

IS - 4

ER -