Radiology, Vol 209, 147-157, Copyright © 1998 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Gadolinium-enhanced excretory MR urography after low-dose diuretic injection: comparison with conventional excretory urography

CC Nolte-Ernsting, A Bucker, GB Adam, JM Neuerburg, P Jung, DW Hunter, G Jakse and RW Gunther
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Technology, Aachen, Germany.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical utility and morphologic accuracy of gadolinium-enhanced excretory magnetic resonance (MR) urography after low-dose diuretic injection and to correlate the results with those of conventional urography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 71 patients with urologic symptoms, excretory MR urography was performed after intravenous injection of 5-10 mg furosemide and, 30-60 seconds later, 0.1 mmol of gadopentetate dimeglumine per kilogram of body weight. The MR urograms were interpreted by three radiologists, who were blinded to the clinical outcome, and subsequently compared with conventional urograms. RESULTS: Injection of furosemide before contrast material led to rapid, uniform gadolinium distribution inside a sufficiently distended collecting system such that there was no excessive concentration of gadolinium in the urine. In patients with normal or moderately reduced excretory function, this effect allowed complete visualization of the urinary tract within 5-20 minutes of contrast material injection while minimizing gadolinium-related endoluminal T2* effects. The clinical course helped verify almost all MR urographic results. The MR urographic technique was significantly superior to conventional urography in the assessment of the ureters and bladder (P < .0001). Delineation of small caliceal abnormalities is still problematic. The best depiction of the pelvicaliceal system was obtained with fat-suppressed MR imaging, although it was still slightly inferior to conventional urography (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Gadolinium- enhanced excretory MR urography performed after low-dose diuretic injection is a promising and accurate alternative to conventional excretory urography for imaging the morphology of the urinary tract.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Takahashi, A. Kawashima, J. F. Glockner, R. P. Hartman, B. C. Leibovich, A. C. S. Brau, P. J. Beatty, and B. F. King Small (<2-cm) Upper-Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: Evaluation with Gadolinium-enhanced Three-dimensional Spoiled Gradient-Recalled Echo MR Urography Radiology, May 1, 2008; 247(2): 451 - 457. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. R. Leyendecker, C. E. Barnes, and R. J. Zagoria MR Urography: Techniques and Clinical Applications RadioGraphics, January 1, 2008; 28(1): 23 - 46. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Pedrosa, E. A. Zeikus, D. Levine, and N. M. Rofsky MR Imaging of Acute Right Lower Quadrant Pain in Pregnant and Nonpregnant Patients RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 721 - 743. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R Garcia-Valtuille, A I Garcia-Valtuille, F Abascal, L Cerezal, and M C Arguello Magnetic resonance urography: a pictorial overview Br. J. Radiol., July 1, 2006; 79(943): 614 - 626. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Riccabona, A. Ruppert-Kohlmayr, E. Ring, C. Maier, L. Lusuardi, and M. Riccabona Potential Impact of Pediatric MR Urography on the Imaging Algorithm in Patients with a Functional Single Kidney Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2004; 183(3): 795 - 800. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. P. Tamm, P. M. Silverman, and W. P. Shuman Evaluation of the Patient with Flank Pain and Possible Ureteral Calculus Radiology, August 1, 2003; 228(2): 319 - 329. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Blandino, M. Gaeta, F. Minutoli, I. Salamone, C. Magno, E. Scribano, and I. Pandolfo MR Urography of the Ureter Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2002; 179(5): 1307 - 1314. [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. K. Rohrschneider, S. Haufe, M. Wiesel, B. Tonshoff, R. Wunsch, K. Darge, J. H. Clorius, and J. Troger Functional and Morphologic Evaluation of Congenital Urinary Tract Dilatation by Using Combined Static-Dynamic MR Urography: Findings in Kidneys with a Single Collecting System Radiology, September 1, 2002; 224(3): 683 - 694. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S Mackenzie Controversies in the radiological investigation of paediatric urinary tract infection Imaging, December 1, 2001; 13(4): 285 - 294. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Sudah, R. Vanninen, K. Partanen, A. Heino, P. Vainio, and M. Ala-Opas MR Urography in Evaluation of Acute Flank Pain: T2-Weighted Sequences and Gadolinium-Enhanced Three-Dimensional FLASH Compared with Urography Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2001; 176(1): 105 - 112. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				E. Neri, P. Boraschi, D. Caramella, L. Battolla, R. Gigoni, N. Armillotta, G. Braccini, and C. Bartolozzi MR Virtual Endoscopy of the Upper Urinary Tract Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2000; 175(6): 1697 - 1702. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. H. Frager Invited Commentary RadioGraphics, September 1, 2000; 20(5): 1353 - 1354. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. M. Maher, T. A. S. Prasad, J. M. Fitzpatrick, J. Corr, D. H. Williams, J. T. Ennis, and J. G. Murray Spinal Dysraphism at MR Urography: Initial Experience Radiology, July 1, 2000; 216(1): 237 - 241. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M. Sudah, R. L. Vanninen, K. Partanen, S. Kainulainen, A. Malinen, A. Heino, and M. Ala-Opas Patients with Acute Flank Pain: Comparison of MR Urography with Unenhanced Helical CT Radiology, April 1, 2002; 223(1): 98 - 105. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]