HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2371041369v1 237/1/45    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pediconi, F. Articles by Passariello, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pediconi, F. Articles by Passariello, R.

Breast Lesion Detection and Characterization at Contrast-enhanced MR Mammography: Gadobenate Dimeglumine versus Gadopentetate Dimeglumine¹

¹ From the Department of Radiological Sciences, University of Rome "La Sapienza," Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy (F.P., C.C., R.O., F.V., F.F., A.N., R.P.); and Worldwide Medical Affairs, Bracco Imaging, Milan, Italy (M.A.K.). Received August 6, 2004; revision requested October 13; revision received November 13; accepted December 16. Address correspondence to F.P. (e-mail: federica.pediconi{at}uniroma1.it).

PURPOSE: To prospectively and intraindividually compare equivalent (0.1 mmol per kilogram of body weight) doses of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for accuracy of detection and characterization of breast lesions at contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) mammography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ethics committee approval and informed consent were obtained. Twenty-six consecutive women (mean age, 47.8 years) suspected of having a breast tumor at mammography and sonography underwent two identical MR examinations at 1.5 T; examinations were separated by more than 48 hours but less than 72 hours. A T1-weighted three-dimensional gradient-echo sequence was used, and images were acquired before and at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minutes after randomized injection of gadopentetate dimeglumine or gadobenate dimeglumine at an identical flow rate of 2 mL/sec. Separate and combined assessment of unenhanced, contrast-enhanced, and subtracted images was performed blindly by two readers in consensus. Accuracy for lesion detection was determined against a final diagnosis based on findings at conventional mammography, sonography, and surgery. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy for malignant lesion identification were determined against histologic results. Data were analyzed with the McNemar test, proportional odds models, and analysis of variance.

RESULTS: MR mammography with gadobenate dimeglumine depicted significantly (P = .003) more lesions (45 of 46) than did that with gadopentetate dimeglumine (36 of 46), and detected lesions were significantly (P < .001) more conspicuous with gadobenate dimeglumine. Confidence for characterization was significantly (P = .031) greater with gadobenate dimeglumine. Comparison of the contrast agents for their ability to help identify malignant lesions revealed significant (P = .02) superiority for gadobenate dimeglumine: Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall accuracy for malignant lesion identification were, respectively, 94.7%, 100%, 100%, 80.0%, and 95.6% with gadobenate dimeglumine and 76.3%, 100%, 100%, 47.1%, and 80.4% with gadopentetate dimeglumine. Quantitative evaluation of signal intensity–time curves revealed significantly (P < .001) greater lesion enhancement with gadobenate dimeglumine.

CONCLUSION: Detection of breast lesions and accurate identification of malignant lesions at MR imaging are significantly superior with gadobenate dimeglumine in comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine.

© RSNA, 2005

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. Schneider, M. Uder, M. Koehler, M. A. Kirchin, A. Massmann, A. Buecker, and U. Geisthoff MR Angiography for Detection of Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformations in Patients with Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 892 - 901. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Pediconi, C. Catalano, A. Roselli, S. Padula, F. Altomari, E. Moriconi, A. M. Pronio, M. A. Kirchin, and R. Passariello Contrast-enhanced MR Mammography for Evaluation of the Contralateral Breast in Patients with Diagnosed Unilateral Breast Cancer or High-Risk Lesions Radiology, June 1, 2007; 243(3): 670 - 680. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. G. ODLE Breast MR Radiol. Technol., September 1, 2006; 78(1): 45M - 66M. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Sardanelli, M. Quarenghi, T. Schlosser, and J. Barkhausen Delayed Enhancement of Subendocardial Infarcted Myocardium with Gadobenate Dimeglumine: A Paradoxical Effect--Is a Double Dose Too Much? Radiology, September 1, 2006; 240(3): 914 - 916. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. R. Maravilla, J. A. Maldjian, I. M. Schmalfuss, M. J. Kuhn, B. C. Bowen, F. J. Wippold II, V. M. Runge, M. V. Knopp, S. Kremer, L. J. Wolansky, et al. Contrast Enhancement of Central Nervous System Lesions: Multicenter Intraindividual Crossover Comparative Study of Two MR Contrast Agents Radiology, August 1, 2006; 240(2): 389 - 400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]