[Increased signal intensities and gadolinium levels in the brain after administration of gadolinium-based MR contrast agents : Clinical observations and results from preclinical research].
Erhöhte Signalintensitäten und Gadolinium-Werte im Gehirn nach Gabe Gadolinium-haltiger MR-Kontrastmittel : Klinische Beobachtungen und Ergebnisse aus präklinischer Forschung.
Brain
Clinical benefits
Dentate nucleus
Globus pallidus
Stability of Gd-based contrast agents
Journal
Der Radiologe
ISSN: 1432-2102
Titre abrégé: Radiologe
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0401257
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
20
3
2019
medline:
20
7
2019
entrez:
20
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Numerous clinical MRI studies have been published that describe an association between the repeated administration of (linear) gadolinium-based contrast agents and increased signal intensity in certain brain areas. In November 2017, the European Commission suspended the use of some of these contrast agents. The background for this decision, both regulatory and scientific, are presented and discussed. The regulatory decisions are evaluated and the clinical and preclinical literature is discussed. Differences in the structure and stability of gadolinium-based contrast agent molecules explain the observed increased signal intensities in individual brain regions (e. g. dentate nucleus) after administration of multiple doses of linear contrast agents. This phenomenon was not observed after administration of multiple doses of macrocyclic contrast agents. Preclinical studies have confirmed these results. To date, no clinical symptoms have been confirmed to be associated with the increased signal intensity or gadolinium presence in the brain.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Numerous clinical MRI studies have been published that describe an association between the repeated administration of (linear) gadolinium-based contrast agents and increased signal intensity in certain brain areas. In November 2017, the European Commission suspended the use of some of these contrast agents.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
The background for this decision, both regulatory and scientific, are presented and discussed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
The regulatory decisions are evaluated and the clinical and preclinical literature is discussed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Differences in the structure and stability of gadolinium-based contrast agent molecules explain the observed increased signal intensities in individual brain regions (e. g. dentate nucleus) after administration of multiple doses of linear contrast agents. This phenomenon was not observed after administration of multiple doses of macrocyclic contrast agents. Preclinical studies have confirmed these results.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
To date, no clinical symptoms have been confirmed to be associated with the increased signal intensity or gadolinium presence in the brain.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30887087
doi: 10.1007/s00117-019-0511-z
pii: 10.1007/s00117-019-0511-z
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Gadolinium
AU0V1LM3JT
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
ger
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
359-368Références
Invest Radiol. 2004 Mar;39(3):138-42
pubmed: 15076005
Br J Radiol. 2007 Jul;80(955):581-2; author reply 584-5
pubmed: 17704318
Invest Radiol. 2008 Jan;43(1):65-75
pubmed: 18097279
Invest Radiol. 2008 Dec;43(12):817-28
pubmed: 19002053
Metallomics. 2009 Nov;1(6):479-88
pubmed: 21305156
Radiology. 2014 Mar;270(3):834-41
pubmed: 24475844
Invest Radiol. 2014 Oct;49(10):685-90
pubmed: 24872007
Radiology. 2015 Jun;275(3):772-82
pubmed: 25742194
Invest Radiol. 2015 Jul;50(7):470-2
pubmed: 25756685
Radiology. 2015 Jun;275(3):783-91
pubmed: 25848905
Radiology. 2015 Jul;276(1):228-32
pubmed: 25942417
Neurochem Res. 2015 Dec;40(12):2583-99
pubmed: 25947369
Eur Radiol. 2016 Mar;26(3):807-15
pubmed: 26105022
Invest Radiol. 2015 Aug;50(8):473-80
pubmed: 26107651
Invest Radiol. 2015 Nov;50(11):743-8
pubmed: 26352749
Eur Radiol. 2016 Mar;26(3):818-9
pubmed: 26391361
Eur Radiol. 2016 Mar;26(3):816-7
pubmed: 26391362
Invest Radiol. 2016 Feb;51(2):83-9
pubmed: 26606548
Invest Radiol. 2016 Feb;51(2):73-82
pubmed: 26606549
Invest Radiol. 2016 Jul;51(7):447-53
pubmed: 26863577
Invest Radiol. 2016 May;51(5):280-9
pubmed: 26953564
Invest Radiol. 2016 Oct;51(10):655-60
pubmed: 27299580
Magn Reson Imaging. 2016 Dec;34(10):1383-1390
pubmed: 27530966
Radiology. 2017 Mar;282(3):743-751
pubmed: 27673510
Eur Radiol. 2017 Jul;27(7):2877-2885
pubmed: 27832312
Radiology. 2017 Mar;282(3):699-707
pubmed: 27925871
Invest Radiol. 2017 May;52(5):255-264
pubmed: 28067754
Radiology. 2017 Mar;282(3):708-716
pubmed: 28076722
Invest Radiol. 2017 Jul;52(7):396-404
pubmed: 28125438
Invest Radiol. 2017 Jul;52(7):389-395
pubmed: 28195932
Neurology. 2017 Mar 21;88(12):1206-1208
pubmed: 28202695
Invest Radiol. 2017 Jun;52(6):324-333
pubmed: 28323657
Eur Radiol. 2017 Oct;27(10):4372-4378
pubmed: 28357495
Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Sep;47(10):1345-1352
pubmed: 28526896
JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Jul 1;171(7):705-707
pubmed: 28531274
Radiology. 2017 Nov;285(2):536-545
pubmed: 28640692
Radiology. 2017 Nov;285(2):546-554
pubmed: 28653860
Invest Radiol. 2018 Jan;53(1):20-25
pubmed: 28742734
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 31;12(8):e0183916
pubmed: 28859167
Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Nov;47(12):1694-1696
pubmed: 28879610
Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Nov;47(12):1690-1691
pubmed: 28884213
Radiology. 2017 Nov;285(2):434-444
pubmed: 28885891
Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Nov;47(12):1692-1693
pubmed: 28887700
Pediatr Radiol. 2017 Nov;47(12):1688-1689
pubmed: 28914340
Radiol Med. 2018 Feb;123(2):125-134
pubmed: 28952018
J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2018 Jan;45:125-130
pubmed: 29173468
Radiology. 2018 Apr;287(1):360-362
pubmed: 29558301
Acta Neuropathol. 2018 Jul;136(1):127-138
pubmed: 29748901
Radiology. 2018 Aug;288(2):424-433
pubmed: 29786486
Radiology. 2018 Aug;288(2):630-632
pubmed: 29916783
Radiology. 2019 Feb;290(2):340-348
pubmed: 30422091
Invest Radiol. 2019 Apr;54(4):229-237
pubmed: 30480554