Does Higher Gadolinium Concentration Play a Role in the Morphologic Assessment of Brain Tumors? Results of a Multicenter Intraindividual Crossover Comparison of Gadobutrol versus Gadobenate Dimeglumine (the MERIT Study)

• Published in: American journal of neuroradiology : AJNR Vol. 33; no. 6; pp. 1050 - 1058
• Main Authors: SEIDL, Z, VYMAZAL, J, ANZALONE, N, CITTERIO, A, SCHNEIDER, G, BASTIANELLO, S, RUSCALLEDA, J, MECHL, M, GOYAL, M, HERMAN, M, COLOSIMO, C, PASOWICZ, M, YEUNG, R, PARANIAK-GIESZCZYK, B, YEMEN, B
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oak Brook, IL American Society of Neuroradiology 01-06-2012
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Biological and medical sciences; Brain; Brain Neoplasms - pathology; Contrast Media; Czech Republic; Electrodiagnosis. Electric activity recording; Female; Humans; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects); Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Male; Medical sciences; Meglumine - analogs & derivatives; Middle Aged; Nervous system; Observer Variation; Organometallic Compounds; Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Young Adult; Czech Republic; Nervous system diseases; Intraindividual comparison; Radiodiagnosis; Gadobenate dimeglumine; Central nervous system; Gadolinium; Tumor; Comparative study; Encephalon
• ISSN: 0195-6108; 1936-959X
• DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3033

Gadobenate dimeglumine has proved advantageous compared with other gadolinium-based contrast agents for contrast-enhanced brain MR imaging. Gadobutrol is a more highly concentrated agent (1.0 mol/L). This study intraindividually compared 0.1-mmol/kg doses of these agents for qualitative and quantitative evaluation of brain tumors.
Adult patients with suspected or known brain tumors underwent 2 identical MR imaging examinations at 1.5T, 1 with gadobenate dimeglumine and the other with gadobutrol, both at a dose of 0.1-mmol/kg body weight. The agents were injected in randomized order separated by 3-14 days. Imaging sequences and acquisition timing were identical for the 2 examinations. Three blinded readers evaluated images qualitatively for diagnostic information (lesion extent, delineation, morphology, enhancement, global preference) and quantitatively for CNR and LBR.
One hundred fourteen of 123 enrolled patients successfully underwent both examinations. Final diagnoses were intra-axial tumors, metastases, extra-axial tumors, "other" tumors, and "nontumor" (49, 46, 8, 7, and 4 subjects, respectively). Readers 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated preference for gadobenate dimeglumine in 46 (40.7%), 54 (47.4%), and 49 (43.0%) patients, respectively, compared with 6, 7, and 7 patients for gadobutrol (P < .0001, all readers). Highly significant (P < .0001, all readers) preference for gadobenate dimeglumine was demonstrated for all other qualitative end points. Inter-reader agreement was good for all evaluations (κ = 0.414-0.629). Significantly superior CNR and LBR were determined for gadobenate dimeglumine (P < .019, all readers).
Significantly greater morphologic information and lesion enhancement are achieved on brain MR imaging with 0.1-mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine compared with gadobutrol at an equivalent dose.