Enhanced transrectal sonography improves sensitivity for the detection of malignant foci within the prostate without substantial loss of specificity. Low-volume tumors with a Gleason score of 6 or less may not be detected with enhanced transrectal sonography.
ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the potential risk of gadobutrol-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment for the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF).Materials and MethodsWe performed a prospective, international, multicenter, open-label study in 55 centers. Patients with moderate to severe renal impairment scheduled for any gadobutrol-enhanced MRI were included. All patients received a single intravenous bolus injection of gadobutrol at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight. The primary target variable was the number of patients who develop NSF within a 2-year follow-up period.ResultsA total of 908 patients were enrolled, including 586 with moderate and 284 with severe renal impairment who are at highest risk for developing NSF. The mean time since renal disease diagnosis was 1.83 and 5.49 years in the moderate and severe renal impairment cohort, respectively. Overall, 184 patients (20.3%) underwent further contrast-enhanced MRI with other gadolinium-based contrast agents within the 2-year follow-up. No patient developed symptoms conclusive of NSF.ConclusionsNo safety concerns with gadobutrol in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment were identified. There were no NSF cases.
Contrast-enhanced transrectal sonography improves the sonographic detection of malignant foci in the prostate. The performance of multiple biopsies of suspicious enhancing foci significantly improves the detection of cancer. There is no advantage to additional examination of the gland after bolus administration of contrast material.
PURPOSEContrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the central nervous system (CNS) with gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) is standard of care for CNS imaging and diagnosis because of the visualization of lesions that cause blood–brain barrier breakdown. Gadobutrol is a macrocyclic GBCA with high concentration and high relaxivity. The objective of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of gadobutrol 1.0 M vs unenhanced imaging and vs the approved macrocyclic agent gadoteridol 0.5 M at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg bodyweight.MATERIALS AND METHODSProspective, multicenter, double-blind, crossover trial in patients who underwent unenhanced MRI followed by enhanced imaging with gadobutrol or gadoteridol. Three blinded readers assessed the magnetic resonance images. The primary efficacy variables included number of lesions detected, degree of lesion contrast-enhancement, lesion border delineation, and lesion internal morphology.RESULTSOf the 402 treated patients, 390 patients received study drugs. Lesion contrast-enhancement, lesion border delineation, and lesion internal morphology were superior for combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced imaging vs unenhanced imaging (P < 0.0001 for all). Compared with gadoteridol, gadobutrol was non-inferior for all primary variables and superior for lesion contrast-enhancement, as well as sensitivity and accuracy for detection of malignant disease. The percentage of patients with at least one drug-related adverse event was similar for gadobutrol (10.0%) and gadoteridol (9.7%).CONCLUSIONGadobutrol is an effective and well-tolerated macrocyclic contrast agent for MRI of the CNS. Gadobutrol demonstrates greater contrast-enhancement and improved sensitivity and accuracy for detection of malignant disease than gadoteridol, likely because of its higher relaxivity.
In a very large multicenter preoperative setting, gadobutrol-enhanced breast MRI demonstrated high levels of sensitivity and specificity, consistent with published data on breast MRI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.