Purpose:To compare the efficacy and safety of two different doses (0.1 and 0.3 mmol/kg of body weight [BW]) of gadodiamide for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (ce-MRA) of the lower extremities with intraarterial digital subtraction angiography (IA-DSA). Materials and Methods:A total of 30 patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease underwent IA-DSA and ce-MRA from the aortic bifurcation down to the ankle. Patients were randomized to receive a total dose of 0.1 or 0.3 mmol/kg of BW gadodiamide (Omniscan, Amersham Buchler), administered intravenously as a series of three automatic bolus injections. Ce-MRA was performed with a 1.5-T system using a body phased-array coil, centered stepwise over the calf, thigh, and pelvic region. A fast T1-weighted, three-dimensional gradient-echo sequence was obtained before and after injection of the allocated dose. IA-DSA was performed using the Seldinger technique and a femoral approach. The vessels under investigation were divided into 31 segments, and ce-MRA and IA-DSA image sets were evaluated in a double-blind fashion for the presence of stenosis, presence of collateral vessels, vessel delineation, and overall image quality. Both dose groups were compared with regard to contrast index (CI) and signal-and contrast-to-noise ratios (SNR, CNR). The occurrence of adverse events or side effects was also documented. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated in relation to the results of stenosis grading.Results: A total of 26 patients were entered in the efficacy evaluation, while all 30 patients were included in the safety assessment. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the 0.1 and 0.3 mmol/kg dose groups were 78.8%/93.0%/ 88.9% vs. 60.2.%/91.5%/83.2%, respectively. The detection of collaterals was similar to IA-DSA for the 0.3 mmol/kg dose group (30.2% vs. 27.4%), but was lower in the 0.1 mmol/kg dose group (27.3% vs. 12.3%). The highdose gadodiamide injection proved to be superior to the 0.1 mmol/kg dose group with regard to vessel delineation and overall image quality (P ϭ 0.007 and P ϭ 0.002, respectively). The difference between the two dose groups regarding CI, SNR, and CNR was significant (P ϭ 0.0001), in favor of the 0.3 mmol/kg dose group. No adverse events were observed in any of the patients. Conclusion:Ce-MRA with gadodiamide is safe and efficacious. Comparison of two different doses with IA-DSA as the standard of reference showed that the 0.3 mmol/kg dose is superior to the standard 0.1 mmol/kg dose with respect to contrast enhancement, vessel delineation, image quality, and detection of collaterals. However, the 0.1 mmol/kg dose was superior to the high dose in the grading of stenosis.

Thin-section hydro-CT and MRI show similar results for the detection of pancreatic neoplasms. Compared to thin-section helical CT, MRI still has the drawbacks of much more time consumption and, still, lower spatial resolution. The use of an oral, superparamagnetic contrast agent added no advantage for pancreatic MRI.

MRI is an accurate procedure in the local staging of prostatic carcinoma. In combination with clinical findings, PSA, and grading scores MRI has a significant influence on treatment selection. Contrast agent administration does not seem to increase the diagnostic accuracy significantly.