作者: Paola Clauser , Thomas H. Helbich , Panagiotis Kapetas , Katja Pinker , Maria Bernathova
DOI: 10.1002/JMRI.26335
关键词: Population 、 Crossover study 、 Nuclear medicine 、 Magnetic resonance imaging 、 Prospective cohort study 、 Gadolinium 、 Stage (cooking) 、 Breast cancer 、 Histopathology 、 Medicine
摘要: Background Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) of the breast is highly sensitive for cancer detection. Multichannel coils and 3T scanners can increase signal, spatial, temporal resolution. In addition, T1 -reduction effect a gadolinium-based contrast agent (GBCA) higher at 3T. Thus, it might be possible to reduce dose GBCA without losing diagnostic information. Purpose To compare three-quarter (0.075 mmol/kg) high-relaxivity gadobenate dimeglumine, with 1.5-fold than on-label (0.15 gadoterate meglumine lesion detection characterization CE-MRI. Study type Prospective, randomized, intraindividual comparative study. Population Eligible were patients abnormalities (BI-RADS 0, 4, 5) on conventional imaging. Each patient underwent two examinations, 24-72 hours apart, one 0.075 mmol/kg other 0.15 administered in randomized order. all, 109 prospectively recruited. Field strength/sequence MRI standard protocol (dynamic-CE, T2 w-TSE, STIR-T2 w, DWI). Assessment Histopathology was reference. Three blinded, off-site radiologists evaluated examinations using BI-RADS lexicon. Statistical tests Lesion detection, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy calculated per-lesion per-region, compared by univariate multivariate analysis (Generalized Estimating Equations, GEE). Results Five excluded, leaving 104 women 142 histologically verified lesions (109 malignant, 33 benign) available evaluation. (84.5-88.7%) not inferior (84.5-90.8%) (P ≥ 0.165). At per-region analysis, demonstrated specificity (96.4-98.7% vs. 92.6-97.3%, P ≤ 0.007) (96.3-97.8% 93.6-96.1%, 0.001) gadoterate. Multivariate superior, reader-independent (odds ratio = 1.7, Data conclusion A Gadobenate allowed increased accuracy. Level evidence 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:1157-1165.