Pulse Repetition Time and Contrast Enhancement: Simulation Study of Gd-BOPTA and Conventional Contrast Agent at Different Field Strengths

Objectives:To investigate theoretically enhancement and optimal pulse repetition times for Gd-BOPTA and Gd-DTPA enhanced brain imaging at 0.23, 1.5, and 3.0 T. Methods:The theoretical relaxation times of unenhanced, conventional contrast agent (Gd-DTPA) and new generation contrast agent (Gd-BOPTA) enhanced glioma were calculated. Then, simulation of the signals and contrasts as a function of concentration and pulse repetition time (TR) in spin echo sequence was done at 0.23, 1.5, and 3.0 T. The effect of echo time (TE) on tumor-white matter contrast was also clarified. Three patient cases were imaged at 0.23 T as a test of principle. Results:Gd-BOPTA may give substantially better glioma-to-white matter contrast than Gd-DTPA but is more sensitive to the length of TR. These characteristics are accentuated at 0.23 T. Optimal TR lengths are shorter for Gd-BOPTA than for Gd-DTPA enhanced imaging at all field strengths. TR optimized for Gd-DTPA may thus give suboptimal contrast in Gd-BOPTA enhanced imaging. Higher enhancement with Gd-BOPTA is further accentuated by short TE. Conclusion:Appropriate TRs at 0.23 T appear to be approximately 300 to 400 milliseconds and 250 to 300 milliseconds, at 1.5 T 500 to 600 milliseconds and 400 to 450 milliseconds and at 3.0 T 550 to 650 milliseconds and 475 to 525 milliseconds using Gd-DTPA and Gd-BOPTA, respectively. For Gd-BOPTA enhanced imaging, it seems justified to optimize TR according to contrast and seek options like parallel excitation (Hadamard encoding) for increasing the number of slices and SNR.

[1]  L Bolinger,et al.  High-resolution imaging using Hadamard encoding. , 1999, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[2]  K. Uğurbil,et al.  Magnetic field and tissue dependencies of human brain longitudinal 1H2O relaxation in vivo , 2007, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  Maximilian F Reiser,et al.  Intraindividual Comparison of MR-Renal Perfusion Imaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T , 2007, Investigative radiology.

[4]  P. A. Rinck,et al.  Field strength and dose dependence of contrast enhancement by gadolinium-based MR contrast agents , 1999, European Radiology.

[5]  P. Matthews,et al.  White matter and lesion T1 relaxation times increase in parallel and correlate with disability in multiple sclerosis , 2002, Journal of Neurology.

[6]  M. Knopp,et al.  Primary and secondary brain tumors at MR imaging: bicentric intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine. , 2004, Radiology.

[7]  F. Schick,et al.  Relaxivity of Gadopentetate Dimeglumine (Magnevist), Gadobutrol (Gadovist), and Gadobenate Dimeglumine (MultiHance) in Human Blood Plasma at 0.2, 1.5, and 3 Tesla , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[8]  E. Rostrup,et al.  Measurement of the arterial concentration of Gd‐DTPA using MRI: A step toward quantitative perfusion imaging , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[9]  M. Knopp,et al.  Evaluation of intraaxial enhancing brain tumors on magnetic resonance imaging: intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for visualization and assessment, and implications for surgical intervention. , 2007, Journal of neurosurgery.

[10]  R E Jacobs,et al.  A model for MRI contrast enhancement using T1 agents. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  I. Nöbauer-Huhmann,et al.  The optimal use of contrast agents at high field MRI , 2006, European Radiology.

[12]  G. Bydder,et al.  INTRAVENOUS CHELATED GADOLINIUM AS A CONTRAST AGENT IN NMR IMAGING OF CEREBRAL TUMOURS , 1984, The Lancet.

[13]  S. H. Koenig Molecular basis of magnetic relaxation of water protons of tissue. , 1996, Academic radiology.

[14]  Sophie Laurent,et al.  Comparative study of the physicochemical properties of six clinical low molecular weight gadolinium contrast agents. , 2006, Contrast media & molecular imaging.

[15]  W. Yuh,et al.  A Clinical Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of MultiHance (Gadobenate Dimeglumine) and Omniscan (Gadodiamide) in Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Central Nervous System Pathology , 2001, Investigative radiology.

[16]  M. Knauth,et al.  Low-field interventional MRI in neurosurgery: finding the right dose of contrast medium , 2001, Neuroradiology.

[17]  J. Koivukangas,et al.  Dynamic MR imaging of brain tumors in low field using undersampled projection reconstruction. , 2004, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[18]  D. May,et al.  Effect of gadolinium concentration on renal signal intensity: An in vitro study with a saline bag model. , 2000, Radiology.

[19]  I. Wilkinson,et al.  Influence of Human Serum Albumin on Longitudinal and Transverse Relaxation Rates (R1 and R2) of Magnetic Resonance Contrast Agents , 2006, Investigative radiology.

[20]  J. Finn,et al.  3.0 Tesla High Spatial Resolution Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography (CE-MRA) of the Pulmonary Circulation: Initial Experience With a 32-Channel Phased Array Coil Using a High Relaxivity Contrast Agent , 2007, Investigative radiology.

[21]  T Tolxdorff,et al.  Histogram‐based characterization of healthy and ischemic brain tissues using multiparametric MR imaging including apparent diffusion coefficient maps and relaxometry , 2000, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[22]  M. Knopp,et al.  Contrast enhancement of central nervous system lesions: multicenter intraindividual crossover comparative study of two MR contrast agents. , 2006, Radiology.

[23]  M. Essig,et al.  Enhancing lesions of the brain: intraindividual crossover comparison of contrast enhancement after gadobenate dimeglumine versus established gadolinium comparators. , 2006, Academic radiology.

[24]  A. Elster How much contrast is enough? Dependence of enhancement on field strength and MR pulse sequence , 1997, European Radiology.

[25]  M. van Buchem,et al.  Comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) with gadopentetate dimeglumine (Gd-DTPA) for enhanced MR imaging of brain and spine tumours in children , 2005, Pediatric Radiology.

[26]  K. Turetschek,et al.  Field strength dependence of MRI contrast enhancement: phantom measurements and application to dynamic breast imaging. , 1996, The British journal of radiology.

[27]  M. Reiser,et al.  MR imaging of the wrist in rheumatoid arthritis using gadobenate dimeglumine , 2001, Skeletal Radiology.

[28]  M. Essig Gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance) in MR imaging of the CNS: studies to assess the benefits of a high relaxivity contrast agent. , 2005, Academic radiology.

[29]  C. Hardy,et al.  A review of 1H nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation in pathology: are T1 and T2 diagnostic? , 1987, Medical physics.

[30]  Wilson Fong Handbook of MRI Pulse Sequences , 2005 .

[31]  J Szumowski,et al.  SIMA: Simultaneous Multislice Acquisition of MR Images by Hadamard‐Encoded Excitation , 1988, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[32]  J. Mintorovitch,et al.  Comparison of Magnetic Properties of MRI Contrast Media Solutions at Different Magnetic Field Strengths , 2005, Investigative radiology.

[33]  S. Schoenberg,et al.  Brain Tumor Enhancement in MR Imaging at 3 Tesla: Comparison of SNR and CNR Gain Using TSE and GRE Techniques , 2007, Investigative radiology.