RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Gadobutrol (GB) and gadoterate meglumine (GM) are contrast agents used for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CEMRA). Supraaortic vasculature (SAV) CEMRAs are used to evaluate stroke risk and neurologic symptoms. There is a need to compare the SAV CEMRA image quality obtained with GB and GM. PURPOSE: To intra-individually compare MRA images obtained with equimolar GB and GM at 1.5 T in the SAV. STUDY TYPE: Prospective, crossover. POPULATION: Twenty-eight subjects (54 ± 13 years; 17 female). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5 T; three-dimensional (3D) gradient recalled echo. ASSESSMENT: Quantitative image quality was measured by normalized signal intensity (SIn ) [SIn = SI blood/SD blood] and contrast ratio (CR) [CR = SI blood/SI muscle], determined by an observer (JWC) with 1 year of vascular imaging experience. Three radiologists (AS, PA, and MU) with (5, 5, and 6 years of) vascular imaging experience evaluated image quality by Likert-scale ratings (of image impression, wall conspicuity, and artifact absence). STATISTICAL TESTS: SIn and CR were compared with paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Bland-Altman plots. Qualitative ratings were compared with Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: No significant difference in SIn was found between GB and GM. CRs with GB were significantly higher than GM at the right common carotid (6.9 ± 2.5 vs. 4.8 ± 1), left internal carotid (7.3 ± 2 vs. 4.4 ± 1.2), right internal carotid (7.7 ± 2.2 vs. 5 ± 1.1), and left vertebral (6.6 ± 2.2 vs. 4.5 ± 1.1) arteries. Bland-Altman plots showed relatively greater differences between GB and GM at higher CRs and SIn s. GM showed significantly higher artifact than GB (3.56 ± 0.52 vs. 3.36 ± 0.46) and significantly lower overall image quality (10.73 ± 1.45 vs. 11.26 ± 1.58) at the left vertebral artery. DATA CONCLUSION: At 1.5 T and equimolar demonstration, GB (0.1 mL/kg, i.e., 0.1 mmol/kg) showed higher CRs in the SAV compared to GM (0.2 mL/kg, i.e., 0.1 mmol/kg) at most vessels. Subjective image quality was not significantly different between the two agents for most vessels. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
