Performance of a new natural oral contrast agent (LumiVision®) in dynamic MR swallowing.


Journal

European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Historique:
received: 26 07 2020
accepted: 23 03 2021
revised: 17 02 2021
pubmed: 25 4 2021
medline: 21 10 2021
entrez: 24 4 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate image quality by first use of LumiVision® in dynamic MR swallowing, a contrast medium consisting of biological substances versus a gadolinium-buttermilk mixture in patients who underwent Nissen fundoplication due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The protocol of this retrospective study was approved by the local Institutional Review Board. A hundred twenty-nine patients (146 examinations) underwent a dynamic MR swallowing study (at 1.5 T or 3.0 T) and received an oral contrast agent. Two readers evaluated the distention of the esophagus, contrast, and traceability of the bolus in a 3-point scale. A steady-state coherent sequence (B-FFE, TrueFISP) was used. The patients were divided into 3 different groups: 53 patients received gadolinium chelate (Dotarem®)-buttermilk mixture (GBM) in a dilution of 1:40 as an oral contrast agent; 44 patients received LumiVision® water mixture (LWM) in a dilution of 1:1 and 49 patients received LumiVision® (L) undiluted. GBM showed significantly better results in overall evaluation for both readers in contrast to LWM (p = .003, p = .002). L also reached significantly better results in overall evaluation than LWM in both readers (p = .004, p = .042). There was no significant difference in the overall evaluation between L and GBM (p = .914, p = .376).According to Landis and Koch, interobserver agreement was "substantial" (Cohen's kappa = 0.738) between both readers. LumiVision® undiluted showed equal image quality compared to gadolinium-buttermilk mixture. The constellation of LumiVision® water mixture led to a clearly negative result in relation to the image quality compared to LumiVision® undiluted. Therefore, oral ingestion of LumiVision® undiluted is recommended for MR swallowing examinations. • LumiVision® undiluted shows significantly better image quality in comparison to LumiVision® diluted in oral application in swallowing MRI. • LumiVision® undiluted shows equal image quality in comparison to gadolinium-buttermilk mixture in oral application. • Oral ingestion of LumiVision® undiluted can replace gadolinium-buttermilk mixture in oral MR examinations.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33893856
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07927-5
pii: 10.1007/s00330-021-07927-5
pmc: PMC8523424
doi:

Substances chimiques

Contrast Media 0
Gadolinium DTPA K2I13DR72L

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

8578-8585

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s).

Références

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2018 Nov;84(11):2522-2534
pubmed: 30032482
Eur Radiol. 2019 Sep;29(9):4691-4698
pubmed: 30805702
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2009 Sep-Oct;33(5):666-71
pubmed: 19820489
Eur Radiol. 2019 Aug;29(8):4400-4407
pubmed: 30421012
Abdom Imaging. 2012 Jun;37(3):447-56
pubmed: 21630051
Eur Radiol. 2002 Jan;12(1):129-33
pubmed: 11868088
Eur Radiol. 2012 Feb;22(2):364-70
pubmed: 21894565
Sci Rep. 2015 Jul 15;5:12112
pubmed: 26175205
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44(8):20150028
pubmed: 26090932
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2004 Sep-Oct;28(5):697-703
pubmed: 15480047
BMC Med Imaging. 2014 Sep 22;14:33
pubmed: 25245815
Magn Reson Imaging. 2006 Feb;24(2):195-200
pubmed: 16455409
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1984 Mar;142(3):619-24
pubmed: 6607655
Eur J Radiol. 2018 Jul;104:14-19
pubmed: 29857860
Invest Radiol. 2000 Dec;35(12):707-11
pubmed: 11204796
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007 Apr;25(4):749-54
pubmed: 17340641
Eur Radiol. 2014 Sep;24(9):2137-45
pubmed: 24965508
Europace. 2017 Aug 1;19(8):1310-1316
pubmed: 27915264
Radiol Med. 2006 Oct;111(7):881-9
pubmed: 17021694
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Nov;203(5):1001-5
pubmed: 25341137
Eur Radiol. 2019 Dec;29(12):6653-6661
pubmed: 31187219

Auteurs

Christiane Kulinna-Cosentini (C)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. Christiane.Kulinna-Cosentini@meduniwien.ac.at.

Michael A Arnoldner (MA)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Wolfgang Schima (W)

Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Göttlicher Heiland Krankenhaus, Barmherzige Schwestern Krankenhaus, and Sankt Josef Krankenhaus, Vienna, Austria.

Ivan Kristo (I)

Department of General Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Sebastian F Schoppmann (SF)

Department of General Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Michael Weber (M)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Enrico P Cosentini (EP)

Department of General Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH