Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40478344›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2025

Recommendations on the use of gadolinium-based contrast agents in the diagnosis and monitoring of common adult intracranial tumours.

Fabio M Doniselli, João Ramos, Amaya Hilario, Valentina Opancina, Anouk van der Hoorn, Antonella Castellano, Aart J van der Molen, Carlo C Quattrocchi, Tarek Yousry, Àlex Rovira and 2 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
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

12 authors.

Fabio M DoniselliNeuroradiology Department, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy.
João RamosDiagnostic Neuroradiology Unit, Imaging Department, Unidade Local de Saúde Gaia e Espinho, Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal.
Amaya HilarioDepartment of Radiology, Neuroradiology Section, University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Valentina OpancinaDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia.
Anouk van der HoornDepartment of Radiology, Medical Imaging Center (MIC), University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Antonella CastellanoNeuroradiology Unit and Cermac, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Aart J van der MolenDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Carlo C QuattrocchiCentre for Medical Sciences-CISMed, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.
Tarek YousryLysholm Department of Neuroradiology, UCLH National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Neuroradiological Academic Unit, UCL Institute of Neurology, London, UK.
Àlex RoviraSection of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. alex.rovira.idi@gencat.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2132-6750
ESMRMB-GREC Working Group
ESNR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) have been indispensable in intracranial tumour imaging, particularly for detecting and characterising malignant lesions, as well as assessing treatment response and disease progression. However, growing concerns about gadolinium deposition in the central nervous system and its environmental impact have prompted a re-evaluation of its use, particularly in the management of benign or stable lesions. This review examines the role of GBCAs in imaging the most common types of intracranial tumours, including gliomas, meningiomas, pituitary adenomas, cranial nerve tumours, and metastases. Recent advancements in high-field MRI scanners and the increasing adoption of 3D T2-weighted sequences, which provide excellent soft-tissue contrast, offer significant opportunities to minimise or eliminate GBCA use. Moreover, advanced MRI methods, such as arterial spin labelling for perfusion imaging and the obtention of synthetic images, have emerged as non-invasive alternatives that further enable contrast-free imaging. Finally, the development of ultra-high-relaxivity contrast agents offers the potential to reduce doses when GBCAs are required. While GBCAs remain essential for imaging certain high-grade gliomas and complex tumour cases, alternative imaging techniques can often replace them in many benign or stable lesions, ensuring diagnostic accuracy and prioritising patient safety. This review highlights strategies to optimise GBCA use, focusing on reducing reliance on GBCAs across different intracranial tumour types. KEY POINTS: Question Current neuro-oncological imaging protocols require refinement to reduce unnecessary gadolinium exposure, mitigate tissue deposition and environmental impact, and maintain diagnostic accuracy. Findings Findings reveal that alternative imaging techniques, including high-field MRI and non-contrast protocols, can reduce GBCAs usage in benign and stable brain tumours. Clinical relevance Minimising gadolinium exposure by reducing or avoiding GBCAs in intracranial tumour imaging effectively mitigates CNS gadolinium retention, lowers environmental impact and toxicity risks, while preserving diagnostic accuracy, enhancing patient safety, and optimising clinical workflows, especially for benign or stable tumours.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsContrast MediaGadoliniumMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultHumansContrast MediaGadoliniumBrain neoplasmsContrast mediaGuidelineMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

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.