We thank Dr. Morcos for his comments on our study on gadolimium-based contrast agent nephrotoxicity [1]. We are glad of the agreement on the most important message of our study, which is, in summary, that the strategy of gadolinium-based contrast agent administration does not seem to reduce the rate of contrast nephropathy as compared to the iodinated iso-osmolality contrast agent in patients with chronic renal insufficiency.In our DISCUSSION section we reported the statement of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology published in 1999: ''intravascular administration of gadolinium-based contrast media was not considered a risk factor for the development of nephrotoxicity event at very high dose of 0.9 mmol/kg of body weight '' [2]. This statement is quite strong and impressive. We quoted the above statement in our DISCUSSION section to stress that preliminary data suggested the low nephrotoxicity of gadolinium-based contrast agents. We have not cited the position paper of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology on the use of gadolinium contrast agents for radiographic examination published in 2002 [3]. However, we still cited other studies reported in prestigious journals supporting the nephrotoxic potential of gadolinium contrast agents [4,5]. There are more than 400 citations related to gadolinium and contrast nephropathy in PUBMED. Our manuscript's references are ''limited'' to those supporting the study hypotesis and results.In summary, there is agreement in rebutting preliminary data, as those by Morcos et al. [2] supporting the potential favorable effect of the gadolinium-contrast agents in preventing contrast nephropathy.