Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34018290›Full record

Trial reportJournal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI2021

Dose-Lowering in Contrast-Enhanced MRI of the Central Nervous System: A Retrospective, Parallel-Group Comparison Using Gadobenate Dimeglumine.

Mark C DeLano, Maria Vittoria Spampinato, Eric Y Chang, Richard G Barr, Richard J Lichtenstein, Cesare Colosimo, Josef Vymazal, Zhibo Wen, Doris D M Lin, Miles A Kirchin and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 11 institutions in 4 countries.

Mark C DeLanoSpectrum Health System, Advanced Radiology Services PC, Division of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, Michigan, USA.
Maria Vittoria SpampinatoDepartment of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Eric Y ChangRadiology Service, VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3633-5630
Richard G BarrDepartment of Radiology, Rootstown, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio, USA.
Richard J LichtensteinDepartment of Radiology, Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, Florida, USA.
Cesare ColosimoInstitute of Radiology, Radiodiagnostica e Neuroradiologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "A. Gemelli", Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Josef VymazalDepartment of Radiology, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
Zhibo WenDepartment of Radiology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Doris D M LinDivision of Neuroradiology, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Miles A KirchinGlobal Medical & Regulatory Affairs, Bracco Imaging SpA, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5803-7867
Gianpaolo PirovanoGlobal Medical & Regulatory Affairs, Bracco Diagnostics Inc., Monroe, New Jersey, USA.
Bracco (Italy) · ITJohns Hopkins University · USMedical University of South Carolina · USNa Homolce Hospital · CZNortheast Ohio Medical University · USOrtho Clinical Diagnostics (United States) · USSarasota Memorial Hospital · USSpectrum Health · USUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · ITVA San Diego Healthcare System · USZhujiang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConcerns over gadolinium (Gd) retention encourage the use of lower Gd doses. However, lower Gd doses may compromise imaging performance. Higher relaxivity gadobenate may be suited to reduced dose protocols. PURPOSE: To compare 0.05 mmol/kg and 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate in patients undergoing enhanced MRI of the central nervous system (CNS). STUDY TYPE: Retrospective, multicenter. POPULATION: Three hundred and fifty-two patients receiving 0.05 (n = 181) or 0.1 (n = 171) mmol/kg gadobenate. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES: 1.5 T and 3.0 T/precontrast and postcontrast T1-weighted spin echo/fast spin echo (SE/FSE) and/or gradient echo/fast field echo (GRE/FFE); precontrast T2-weighted FSE and T2-FLAIR. ASSESSMENT: Images of patients with extra-axial lesions at 1.5 T or any CNS lesion at 3.0 T were reviewed by three blinded, independent neuroradiologists for qualitative (lesion border delineation, internal morphology visualization, contrast enhancement; scores from 1 = poor to 4 = excellent) and quantitative (lesion-to-brain ratio [LBR], contrast-to-noise ratio [CNR]; SI measurements at regions-of-interest on lesion and normal parenchyma) enhancement measures. Noninferiority of 0.05 mmol/kg gadobenate was determined for each qualitative endpoint if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in precontrast + postcontrast means was above a noninferiority margin of -0.4. STATISTICAL TESTS: Student's t-test for comparison of mean qualitative endpoint scores, Wilcoxon signed rank test for comparison of LBR and CNR values; Wilcoxon rank sum test for comparison of SI changes. Tests were significant for P < 0.05.

resultsThe mean change from precontrast to precontrast + postcontrast was significant for all endpoints. Readers 1, 2, and 3 evaluated 304, 225, and 249 lesions for 0.05 mmol/kg gadobenate, and 382, 309, and 298 lesions for 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate. The lower limit of the 95% CI was above -0.4 for all comparisons. Significantly, higher LBR and CNR was observed with the higher dose. DATA

conclusion0.05 mmol/kg gadobenate was noninferior to 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenate for lesion visualization. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsOrganometallic CompoundsBrainContrast MediaGadolinium DTPAHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMeglumineRetrospective StudiesContrast Mediagadobenic acidGadolinium DTPAMeglumineOrganometallic Compoundscomparative studiescontrast efficacygadobenate dimeglumineGBCA safety

Identifiers

PMID34018290
PMCPMC9290706
OpenAlexW3161488038

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.