2014
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-014-0248-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inter- and intra-individual comparative study of two gadolinium-based agents: A pilot study

Abstract: This small-scale multi-blinded study characterizes a strategy to objectively assess intravenous contrast agents, which may be an ideal method to evaluate whether a new contrast agent should be introduced for clinical use at any institution, and to re-evaluate the agent in standard use. Whenever available, intra-individual assessment may be ideal.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 29 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The relatively low specific organ percent enhancement compared to other studies (1,25,26) possibly reflects the hybrid nature of the final images combining data across multiple phases: pre-contrast, immediate post-injection, hepatic arterial, and early portal venous phases, which may lead to a lower percent enhancement. However, we do not believe that direct quantitative comparison between these two sequences would be essentially valid because, as they represent two different GRE techniques, and due to the fact that our proposed approach is hybrid in nature and not intended to replace the gold standard Cartesian sequence in patients who are able to breath hold.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…The relatively low specific organ percent enhancement compared to other studies (1,25,26) possibly reflects the hybrid nature of the final images combining data across multiple phases: pre-contrast, immediate post-injection, hepatic arterial, and early portal venous phases, which may lead to a lower percent enhancement. However, we do not believe that direct quantitative comparison between these two sequences would be essentially valid because, as they represent two different GRE techniques, and due to the fact that our proposed approach is hybrid in nature and not intended to replace the gold standard Cartesian sequence in patients who are able to breath hold.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%