Contrast Media pp 219-225 | Cite as

Organ-Specific Gadolinium-Based Contrast Media

Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)


Organ-specific contrast agents were developed after conventional extracellular gadolinium chelates and there are fewer data about their safety. They belong to different classes of agent and therefore exhibit different physicochemical properties, modes of action, and metabolic pathways. Currently, agents for both hepatobiliary imaging and blood pool imaging are available commercially. Based on laboratory data, all these agents are considered to be in the ‘intermediate risk’ category for inducing NSF. NSF has not been reported after any of these agents, but clinical experience is extremely limited for two of them.


Contrast Agent Magnetic Resonance Angiography Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis Gadopentetate Dimeglumine Gadolinium Chelate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bellin MF, Zaim S, Auberton E et al (1994) Liver metastases: safety and efficacy of detection with superparamagnetic iron oxide in MR imaging. Radiology 193:657–663PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bellin MF, Vasile M, Morel-Precetti S (2003) Currently used non-specific extracellular MR contrast media. Eur Radiol 13:2688–2698PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bluemke AD, Sahani D, Amendola M et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of MR imaging with liver specific contrast agent: US multicenter phase III study. Radiology 237:89–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bollow M, Taupitz M, Hamm B et al (1997) Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-DTPA as a hepatobiliary contrast agent for use in MR cholangiography: results of an in vivo phase-I clinical evaluation. Eur Radiol 7:126–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bosch E, Kreitner KF, Peirano MF et al (2008) Safety and efficacy of gadofosveset-enhanced MR angiography for evaluation of pedal arterial disease: multicenter comparative phase III study. Am J Roentgenol 190:179–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Breuer J, Balzer T, Shamsi K et al (2003) Clinical experience from phase II and phase III studies for Gd-EOB-DTPA: a new liver specific MR contrast agent. Eur Radiol 13(Suppl 2):S109Google Scholar
  7. Brismar TB, Kartalis N, Kylander C, Albiin N (2012) MRI of colorectal cancer liver metastases: comparison of orally administered manganese with intravenously administered gadobenate dimeglumine. Eur Radiol 22:633–641PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Caravan P, Comuzzi C, Crooks W et al (2001) Thermodynamic stability and kinetic inertness of MS-325, a new blood pool agent for magnetic resonance imaging. Inorg Chem 40:2170–2176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caudana R, Morana G, Pirovano GP et al (1996) Focal malignant hepatic lesions: MR imaging enhanced with gadolinium benzyloxypropionictetra-acetate (BOPTA)–preliminary results of phase II clinical application. Radiology 199:513–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cavagna FM, Maggioni F, Castelli PM et al (1997) Gadolinium chelates with weak binding to serum proteins: a new class of high-efficiency, general purpose contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 32:780–796PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrysochou C, Power A, Shurrab AE et al (2010) Low risk for nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in nondialysis patients who have chronic kidney disease and are investigated with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5:484–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davenport MS, Viglianti BL, Al-Hawary MM et al (2013) Comparison of acute transient dyspnea after intravenous administration of gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine: effect on arterial phase image quality. Radiology 266:452–461Google Scholar
  13. Dohr O, Hofmeister R, Treher M, Schweinfurth H (2007) Preclinical safety evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA (Primovist). Invest Radiol 42:830–841PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Giovagnoni A, Paci E (1996) Liver III: gadolinium-based hepatobiliary contrast agents (Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-BOPTA/Dimeg). Magn Reson Imaging Clin North Am 4:61–72Google Scholar
  15. Goyen M, Edelman M, Perreault P et al (2005) MR angiography of aortoiliac occlusive disease: a phase III study of the safety and effectiveness of the blood-pool contrast agent MS-325. Radiology 236:825–833PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grazioli L, Morana G, Caudana R et al (2000) Hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation between gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI and pathological findings. Invest Radiol 35:25–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gschwend S, Ebert W, Schultze-Mosgau M, Breuer J (2011) Pharmacokinetics and imaging properties of Gd-EOB-DTPA in patients with hepatic and renal impairment. Invest Radiol 46:556–566PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Halavaara J, Breuer J, Ayuso C et al (2006) Liver tumor characterization: comparison between liver-specific Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI and biphasic CT: a multicenter trial. J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:345–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hamm B, Staks T, Mühler A et al (1995) Phase I clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a hepatobiliary MR contrast agent: safety, pharmacokinetics, and MR imaging. Radiology 195:785–792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Hamm B, Kirchin M, Pirovano G et al (1999) Clinical utility and safety of MultiHance in magnetic resonance imaging of liver cancer: results of multicenter studies in Europe and the USA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 23(Suppl 1):S53–S60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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 181:652–657PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A et al for the European EOB Study Group (2004) Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology 230:266–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ichikawa T, Saito K, Yoshioka N et al (2010) Detection and characterization of focal liver lesions: a Japanese phase III, multicenter comparison between gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced computed tomography predominantly in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and chronic liver disease. Invest Radiol 45:133–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Iezzi R, Soulez G, Thurnher S et al (2011) Contrast-enhanced MRA of the renal and aorto-iliac-femoral arteries: comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadofosveset trisodium. Eur J Radiol 77:358–368PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kato N, Yokawa T, Tamura A et al (2002) Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid interaction with clinical drugs in rats. Invest Radiol 37:680–684PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirchin MA, Runge VM (2003) Contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging: safety update. Top Magn Reson Imaging 14:426–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kirchin MA, Pirovano G, Spinazzi A (1998) Gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA): an overview. Invest Radiol 33:798–809PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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 14:281–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuwatsuru R, Kadoya M, Ohtomo K et al (2001) Comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine with gadopentetate dimeglumine for magnetic resonance imaging of liver tumors. Invest Radiol 36:632–641Google Scholar
  30. Lin SP, Brown JJ (2007) MR contrast agents: physical and pharmacologic basics. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:884–899PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Manfredi R, Maresca G, Baron RL et al (1998) Gadobenate dimeglumine (BOPTA)-enhanced MR imaging: patterns of enhancement in normal liver and cirrhosis. J Magn Reson Imaging 8:862–867CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Manfredi R, Maresca G, Baron RL et al. (1999) Delayed MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma enhanced by gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA). J Magn Reson Imaging 9:704–710Google Scholar
  33. Martincich L, Faivre-Pierret M, Zechmann CM et al (2011) Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine and gadopentetate dimeglumine for breast MR imaging (DETECT Trial). Radiology 258:396–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nikolaou K, Kramer H, Grosse D et al (2006) High-spatial-resolution multistation MR angiography with parallel imaging and blood pool agent: initial experience. Radiology 241:861–872PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Perreault P, Edelman MA, Baum RA et al (2003) MR angiography with gadofosveset trisodium for peripheral vascular disease phase II trial. Radiology 229:811–820Google Scholar
  36. Peterstein J, Spinazzi A, Giovagnoni A et al (2000) Evaluation of the efficacy of gadobenate dimeglumine in magnetic resonance imaging of focal liver lesions: a multicenter phase III clinical study. Radiology 215:727–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Raman SS, Leary C, Bluemke DA et al (United States EOB Study Group) (2010) Improved characterization of focal liver lesions with liver-specific gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a multicenter phase III clinical trial. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34:163–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rapp JH, Wolff SD, Quinn JA et al (2005) Aortoiliac occlusive disease in patients with known or suspected peripheral vascular disease: safety and efficacy of gadofosveset-enhanced MR angiography-multicenter comparative phase III study. Radiology 236:71–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Reimer P, Rummeny EJ, Shamsi K et al (1996) Phase II clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA: dose, safety aspects, and pulse sequence. Radiology 199:177–183PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Reimer P, Schneider G, Schima W (2004) Hepatobiliary contrast agents for contrast-enhanced MRI of the liver: properties, clinical development and applications. Eur Radiol 14:559–578PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rosati G, Pirovano G, Spinazzi A (1994) Interim results of phase II clinical testing of gadobenate dimeglumine. Invest Radiol 29:S183–S185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schuhmann-Giampieri G, Schmitt-Willich H, Press WR et al (1992) Preclinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a contrast agent in MR imaging of the hepatobiliary system. Radiology 183:59–64PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Shamsi K, Yucel EK, Chamberlin P (2006) A summary of safety of gadofosveset (MS-325) at 0.03 mmol/kg body weight dose: phase II and phase III clinical trials data. Invest Radiol 41:822–830PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 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 24:1378–1385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schneider G, Pasowicz M, Vymazal J et al (2010) Gadobenate dimeglumine and gadofosveset trisodium for MR angiography of the renal arteries: Multicenter intraindividual crossover comparison. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:476–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schneider G, Schürholz H, Kirchin MA et al (2013) Safety and adverse effects during 24 hours after contrast-enhanced MRI with gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance®) in children. Pediatr Radiol 43:202–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spinazzi A, Lorusso V, Pirovano G et al (1999) Safety, tolerance, biodistribution and MR imaging enhancement of the liver with Gd-BOPTA: results of clinical pharmacologic and pilot imaging studies in non-patient and patient volunteers. Acad Radiol 6:282–291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Steger-Hartmann T, Graham PB, Müller S, Schweinfurth H (2006) Preclinical safety assessment of Vasovist (gadofosveset trisodium), a new paramagnetic resonance imaging contrast agent for angiography. Invest Radiol 41:449–459Google Scholar
  49. Stenver DI (2008) Pharmacovigilance: What to do if you see an adverse reaction and the consequences. Eur J Radiol 66:184–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stern W, Schick F, Kopp AF et al (2000) Dynamic MR imaging of liver metastases with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Acta Radiol 41:255–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vogl TJ, Stupavsky A, Pegios W et al (1997) Hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation with dynamic and static gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced MR imaging and histopathologic correlation. Radiology 205:721–728PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Weinmann HJ, Schuhmann-Gampieri G, Schmitt-Willich H et al (1992) A new lipophilic gadolinium chelate as a tissue-specific contrast medium for MRI. Magn Reson Med 22:233–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Service de Radiologie Générale AdultesHôpital de Bicêtre, Secteur Paul BrocaLe Kremlin-Bicêtre CedexFrance
  2. 2.Department of RadiologySkåne University HospitalMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations