Search

To assess the reproducibility and image quality of immediate postgadolinium chelate spoiled gradient-echo MRI in demonstrating disease of the abdominal aorta. All patients (27 patients: 21 men, 6 women) with substantial disease of the abdominal aorta, who underwent abdominal MR examinations at 1.5 T between 1991 and 1995, were entered in the study. Patients were referred for evaluation of suspected aortic disease (14 patients) or other abdominal diseases (13 patients). Three experienced investigators manually measured luminal and external aortic wall diameters and rated image quality, definition of inner and outer walls, extent of disease, and presence of other abdominal abnormalities, in an independent fashion. A cardiovascular surgeon then rated all studies to determine whether clinical management could be based on the MR findings alone. There was 98 to 99% agreement in measurements of luminal and external wall diameter between the three investigators. Overall image quality was rated as good in 77.8 to 88.9% of patients. A total of 31 additional nonaortic abdominal abnormalities were detected by all observers. The cardiovascular surgeon rated 25 of 27 studies as adequate to determine clinical management based on MR findings alone. Immediate postgadolinium spoiled gradient-echo MRI is a reproducible technique for the demonstration of abdominal aortic disease and possesses good image quality. Advantages of this technique include simultaneous evaluation of other nonvascular diseases of the abdomen, short examination time, and easy implementation as part of routine abdominal MRI scanning protocol.

Purpose: To determine the effect of glucagon and orally administered contrast material on hepatic enhancement and metastatic lesion conspicuity on computed tomographic (CT) scans., Materials and Methods: Nine patients with a history of hepatic metastasis underwent two CT examinations with intravenously administered contrast material. Each patient was given orally administered CT contrast material for the first examination. No oral contrast material was given in the second examination. Five patients underwent the initial CT with intravenous administration of 1 mg of glucagon; the second examination was performed without glucagon. Four patients were administered glucagon before the second examination, but no glucagon was administered before the first. Attenuation in the liver, portal vein, and aorta was measured by observers blinded to whether the patient had been given glucagon. Lesion conspicuity was rated on a continuous scale., Results: Greater mean hepatic enhancement was noted on scans of patients in whom oral contrast material was administered (mean, 52 HU) versus those in whom no oral contrast material was administered (mean, 47 HU; P = .019). Glucagon was not associated with greater hepatic enhancement. Neither oral contrast material nor glucagon had a significant effect on lesion conspicuity., Conclusion: Oral CT contrast material is associated with a small increase in hepatic enhancement that does not appear to be clinically important. Glucagon does not appear to affect hepatic enhancement or lesion conspicuity in humans.

The purpose of this paper was to compare manganese-DPDP (Mn-DPDP) and gadolinium chelate (Gd-DTPA) contrast agents for enhancement of the normal pancreas. A total of 14 patients with focal liver disease underwent Mn-DPDP- and Gd-DTPA-enhanced 1.5 T MR examinations using spoiled gradient-echo (FLASH) technique at two separate times. Contrast agents were injected according to the currently recommended practices; Gd-DTPA was injected as a rapid bolus injection in a dosage of 0.1 mmol/kg, and Mn-DPDP was injected as a slow IV injection in a dosage of 5 mumol/kg. Quantitative region of interest measurements were made in 11 patients, and percent contrast enhancement of the pancreas and pancreas-fat signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) were determined for each agent. Images were also evaluated qualitatively by consensus reading of two investigators and overall scan quality was rated on a scale from 1 (poor) to 4 (very good). Enhancement of the pancreas immediately post Gd-DTPA was significantly higher than 15 min post Mn-DPDP (73.3 vs 36.3%; p = 0.003). On postcontrast images the pancreas-fat SNR measurements were 7.7 (i.e., pancreas higher in signal than fat) and -6.1 for Gd-DTPA and Mn-DPDP, respectively, which was significantly different (p < 0.001). Image quality was rated as 3.1 and 2.5 for Gd-DTPA- and Mn-DPDP-enhanced images, respectively. The normal pancreas enhances significantly more with Gd-DTPA than with Mn-DPDP administered under the conditions of this study. Overall image quality is also greater on the Gd-DTPA-enhanced images.

Rationale and Objectives: To study the practice of obtaining serum creatinine before administering intravenous iodinated contrast medium and the costs associated with this practice., Materials and Methods: In June 1993, a questionnaire was sent to 217 physicians who are members of the Society of Uroradiology or the Society of Computed Body Tomography/Magnetic Resonance. There were 149 respondents who completed a total of 70 questionnaires, providing a response rate of 69% (149/217)., Results: The percentage of institutions that always require a serum creatinine before administering intravenous contrast medium for excretory urography, body computed tomography, and head computed tomography was 13%, 20%, and 14%, respectively. In institutions where routine serum creatinine is not required, approximately 60% request a serum creatinine in either insulin-dependent or juvenile type 1 diabetes. The mean maximal acceptable time between the serum creatinine value and contrast administration is 29 days. It takes a mean of 69 minutes to get the results of a stat serum creatinine and costs a mean of 15 dollars for the test. In patients with no risk factors, the mean for the highest serum creatinine value at which respondents still gave contrast was 2.1 mg/dL; in patients with risk factors, the mean was 1.9 mg/dL. There was no correlation between the use of serum creatinine and the number of studies performed in the institution or the type of contrast used., Conclusions: The practice of requiring a pretest serum creatinine and its interpretation regarding the use of contrast media are quite variable. In view of this disparity in opinion, development and acceptance of a list of patients who are at increased risk for contrast-induced nephropathy may be desirable.