Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37658891›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2024

Use of gadolinium-based contrast agents in multiple sclerosis: a review by the ESMRMB-GREC and ESNR Multiple Sclerosis Working Group.

Àlex Rovira, Fabio M Doniselli, Cristina Auger, Lukas Haider, Jerome Hodel, Mariasavina Severino, Mike P Wattjes, Aart J van der Molen, Bas Jasperse, Carlo A Mallio and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Impact of sex on multiple sclerosis therapy.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. TJournal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 11 institutions in 7 countries.

Àlex RoviraSection of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. alex.rovira.idi@gencat.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2132-6750
Fabio M DoniselliNeuroradiology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2272-7855
Cristina AugerSection of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, University Hospital Vall d'Hebron, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9846-4767
Lukas HaiderDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1556-1770
Jerome HodelDepartment of Radiology, Groupe Hospitalier Paris-Saint Joseph, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9029-6890
Mariasavina SeverinoNeuroradiology Unit, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, Genoa, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4730-5322
Mike P WattjesDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9298-2897
Aart J van der MolenDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2376-9424
Bas JasperseDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, MS Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1577-8299
Carlo A MallioFondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0149-0801
Tarek YousryLysholm Department of Neuroradiology, UCLH National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Neuroradiological Academic Unit, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3295-0628
Carlo C QuattrocchiCentre for Medical Sciences CISMed, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6823-7707
ESMRMB-GREC Working Group and of the ESNR Multiple Sclerosis Working Group
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLFondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta · ITHôpital Paris Saint-Joseph · FRIstituto Giannina Gaslini · ITLeiden University Medical Center · NLMedizinische Hochschule Hannover · DENational Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · ITUniversity of Trento · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive technique for detecting inflammatory demyelinating lesions in multiple sclerosis (MS) and plays a crucial role in diagnosis and monitoring treatment effectiveness, and for predicting the disease course. In clinical practice, detection of MS lesions is mainly based on T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted sequences. Contrast-enhancing lesions (CEL) on T1-weighted sequences are related to (sub)acute inflammation, while new or enlarging T2 lesions reflect the permanent footprint from a previous acute inflammatory demyelinating event. These two types of MRI features provide redundant information, at least in regular monitoring of the disease. Due to the concern of gadolinium deposition after repetitive injections of gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs), scientific organizations and regulatory agencies in Europe and North America have proposed that these contrast agents should be administered only if clinically necessary. In this article, we provide data on the mode of action of GBCAs in MS, the indications of the use of these agents in clinical practice, their value in MS for diagnostic, prognostic, and monitoring purposes, and their use in specific populations (children, pregnant women, and breast-feeders). We discuss imaging strategies that achieve the highest sensitivity for detecting CELs in compliance with the safety regulations established by different regulatory agencies. Finally, we will briefly discuss some alternatives to the use of GBCA for detecting blood-brain barrier disruption in MS lesions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Although use of GBCA at diagnostic workup of suspected MS is highly valuable for diagnostic and prognostic purposes, their use in routine monitoring is not mandatory and must be reduced, as detection of disease activity can be based on the identification of new or enlarging lesions on T2-weighted images. KEY POINTS: • Both the EMA and the FDA state that the use of GBCA in medicine should be restricted to clinical scenarios in which the additional information offered by the contrast agent is required. • The use of GBCA is generally recommended in the diagnostic workup in subjects with suspected MS and is generally not necessary for routine monitoring in clinical practice. • Alternative MRI-based approaches for detecting acute focal inflammatory MS lesions are not yet ready to be used in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaMultiple SclerosisBrainChildDisease ProgressionFemaleGadoliniumHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPregnancyContrast MediaGadoliniumGadoliniumMagnetic resonance imagingMultiple sclerosisPractice guidelineSafety

Identifiers

PMID37658891
OpenAlexW4386387735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.