Safety and adverse effects during 24 hours after contrast-enhanced MRI with gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance®) in children
- 621 Downloads
Gadolinium-based MR contrast agents have long been considered safe for routine diagnostic imaging. However, the advent of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF) among certain patients with severe renal insufficiency has brought the issue of safety into question. Nowhere is safety of greater concern than among children who frequently require multiple contrast-enhanced MRI examinations over an extended period of time.
To retrospectively evaluate the safety of gadobenate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced (CE) MRI across a range of indications.
Materials and methods
Two hundred pediatric inpatients (age: 4 days to 15 years) underwent CE MRI as part of clinical routine. The children received a gadobenate dimeglumine dose of either 0.05 mmol/kg body weight (liver, abdominal imaging, musculoskeletal imaging, brain and other rare indications) or 0.1 mmol/kg bodyweight (cardiovascular imaging, MR-urography). Young (< 8 years) children with congenital heart disease were intubated and underwent MRA evaluation with controlled ventilation. Monitoring for adverse events was performed for at least 24 h after each gadobenate dimeglumine injection. Depending on clinical necessity, laboratory measurements and, in some cases, vital sign and ECG determinations were made before and after contrast injection. Safety was evaluated by age group, indication and dose administered.
No clinically adverse events were reported among children who had one MRI scan only or among children who had several examinations. There were no changes in creatinine or bilirubin levels even in very young children.
No adverse events were recorded during the first 24 h following administration of gadobenate dimeglumine in 200 children.
KeywordsContrast media Magnetic resonance imaging MRI Safety Gadobenate dimeglumine
- 2.Nelson KL, Gifford LM, Lauber-Huber C et al (1995) Clinical safety of gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology 196:439–443Google Scholar
- 4.Tresley RM, Stone LA, Fields N et al (1997) Clinical safety of serial monthly administrations of gadopentetate dimeglumine in patients with multiple sclerosis: implications for natural history and early-phase treatment trials. Neurology 48:832–835Google Scholar
- 7.Niendorf HP, Kallend D (1999) Gadolinium chelates: adverse reactions. In: Dawson P, Cosgrove DO, Grainger RG (eds) Textbook of contrast media. ISIS Medical Media, Oxford, UK, pp 323–332Google Scholar
- 9.Rubin DL, Desser TS, Semelka R et al (1999) A multicenter, randomized, double-blind study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of OptiMARK (gadoversetamide injection) compared with Magnevist (gadopentetate dimeglumine) in patients with liver pathology: results of a Phase III clinical trial. J Magn Reson Imaging 9:240–250PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.De Ridder F, De Maeseneer M, Stadnik T et al (2001) Severe adverse reactions with contrast agents for magnetic resonance: clinical experience in 30,000 MR examinations. JBR-BTR 84:150–152Google Scholar
- 14.Baker JF, Kratz LC, Stevens GR et al (2004) Pharmacokinetics and safety of the MRI contrast agent gadoversetamide injection (OptiMARK) in healthy pediatric subjects. Invest Radiol 39:334–339Google Scholar
- 17.Knopp MV, Balzer T, Esser M et al (2006) Assessment of utilization and pharmacovigilance based on spontaneous adverse event reporting of gadopentetate dimeglumine as a magnetic resonance contrast agent after 45 million administrations and 15 years of clinical use. Invest Radiol 41:491–499, Erratum in: Invest Radiol 41:667Google Scholar
- 20.Li A, Wong CS, Wong MK et al (2006) Acute adverse reactions to magnetic resonance contrast media--gadolinium chelates. Br J Radiol 79(941):368–371, Erratum in: Br J Radiol 80:145Google Scholar
- 23.Broome DR, Girguis MS, Baron PW et al (2007) Gadodiamide-associated nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: why radiologists should be concerned. AJR 188:586–592Google Scholar
- 25.Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, Bell C et al (2007) ACR Blue Ribbon Panel on MR Safety. ACR guidance document for safe MR practices: 2007. AJR 188:1447–1474Google Scholar
- 27.Kirchin MA, Pirovano G, Venetianer C et al (2001) Safety assessment of gadobenate dimeglumine (Multihance®): extended clinical experience from phase I studies to post-marketing surveillance. J Magn Reson Imaging 14:281–294Google Scholar
- 28.Shellock FG, Parker JR, Venetianer C et al (2006) Safety of gadobenate dimeglumine: summary of findings from clinical studies and post-marketing surveillance. Invest Radiol 41:500–509Google Scholar
- 29.Shellock FG, Parker JR, Pirovano G et al (2006) Safety characteristics of gadobenate dimeglumine: Clinical experience from intra- and interindividual comparison studies with gadopentetate dimeglumine. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:1378–1385Google Scholar
- 30.Bleicher AG, Kanal E (2008) Assessment of adverse reaction rates to a newly approved MRI contrast agent: review of 23,553 administrations of gadobenate dimeglumine. AJR 191:W307–W311Google Scholar
- 31.Herborn CU, Jäger-Booth I, Lodemann KP et al (2009) [Multicenter analysis of tolerance and clinical safety of the extracellular MR contrast agent gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance)]. Rofo 181:652–657Google Scholar
- 32.Pintaske J, Martirosian P, Graf H et al (2006) Relaxivity of Gadopentetate Dimeglumine (Magnevist), Gadobutrol (Gadovist), and Gadobenate Dimeglumine (MultiHance) in human blood plasma at 0.2, 1.5, and 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol 41:213–221, Erratum in: Invest Radiol 41:859Google Scholar
- 33.Bleicher AG, Kanal E (2008) A serial dilution study of gadolinium-based MR imaging contrast agents. AJNR 29:668–673Google Scholar
- 35.Spinazzi A, Lorusso V, Pirovano G et al (1999) Safety, tolerance, biodistribution and MR imaging enhancement of the liver with gadobenate dimeglumine. Acad Radiol 6:282–291Google Scholar
- 37.Schneider G, Maas R, Schultze Kool L et al (2003) Low-dose gadobenate dimeglumine versus standard dose gadopentetate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the liver: an intra-individual crossover comparison. Invest Radiol 38:85–94Google Scholar
- 38.Grazioli L, Morana G, Kirchin MA et al (2005) Accurate differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia from hepatic adenoma at gadobenate dimeglumine – enhanced MR imaging: prospective study. Radiology 236:166–177Google Scholar
- 43.Bültmann E, Erb G, Kirchin MA et al (2008) Intra-individual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the supraaortic vessels at 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol 43:695–702Google Scholar
- 45.Prokop M, Schneider G, Vanzulli A et al (2005) Contrast-enhanced MR Angiography of the renal arteries: blinded multicenter crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine. Radiology 234:399–408Google Scholar
- 48.Achenbach M, Figiel JH, Burbelko M et al (2010) Prospective comparison of image quality and diagnostic accuracy of 0.5 molar gadobenate dimeglumine and 1.0 molar gadobutrol in contrast-enhanced run-off magnetic resonance angiography of the lower extremities. J Magn Reson Imaging 32:1166–1171Google Scholar
- 49.Balci NC, Inan N, Anik Y et al (2006) Low-dose gadobenate dimeglumine versus standard-dose gadopentate dimeglumine for delayed contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Acad Radiol 13:833–839Google Scholar
- 50.Li Y, Li X, Li D et al (2012) Multicenter, intra-individual comparison of single dose gadobenate dimeglumine and double dose gadopentetate dimeglumine for MR Angiography of the supra-aortic arteries (the supra-aortic VALUE study). AJNR. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3298
- 51.Tomasian A, Salamon N, Lohan DG et al (2008) Supraaortic arteries: contrast material dose reduction at 3.0-T high-spatial-resolution MR angiography–feasibility study. Radiology 249:980–990Google Scholar
- 53.Mendichovszky IA, Marks SD, Simcock CM et al (2008) Gadolinium and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: time to tighten practice. Pediatr Radiol 38:489–496Google Scholar
- 54.Pirovano G, Munley J, Schultz C et al (2012) Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: a review of published cases and results from three prospective observational studies. Presented at European Congress of Radiology, Vienna, Austria; March 1–5.Google Scholar