{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,27]],"date-time":"2026-05-27T18:21:36Z","timestamp":1779906096334,"version":"3.53.1"},"reference-count":23,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,3]],"date-time":"2016-10-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1475452800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"funder":[{"name":"Bayer Schering Pharma Healthcare, China"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Magnetic Resonance Imaging"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2017,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title><jats:p>To compare gadobutrol and gadopentetate dimeglumine (Gd\u2010DTPA) contrast\u2010enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3T for visualizing brain metastases.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Materials and Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>The present randomized study included 60 consecutive patients with known or suspected brain metastases from systemic malignancies. Two enhanced cerebral MR scans were performed in each patient within an interval of 2\u20135 days using different contrast agents (gadobutrol or Gd\u2010DTPA) at 3T. The dose of the contrast agents (0.1 mmol\/kg Gd) was also identical. The axial<jats:italic>T<\/jats:italic><jats:sub>1<\/jats:sub>FLAIR images at 3, 7, and 10 minutes after the injection of the contrast agent were obtained for evaluation. Two experienced radiologists performed subjective evaluation of the image quality, made the choice of the optimal images, and performed an objective evaluation including: signal\u2010to\u2010noise ratio (SNR) of the brain metastases, contrast\u2010to\u2010noise ratio (CNR), contrast enhancement (CE), contrast\u2010to\u2010brain ratio (CBR), and contrast enhancement ratio (CER) of the brain metastases.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>Subjective evaluation showed that at 3, 7, and 10 minutes gadobutrol elicited higher scores (margin score: 3.56\u2009\u00b1\u20090.74 vs. 3.33\u2009\u00b1\u20090.93, 3.68\u2009\u00b1\u20090.57 vs. 3.45\u2009\u00b1\u20090.81, 3.58\u2009\u00b1\u20090.71 vs. 3.43\u2009\u00b1\u20090.76; interior score: 2.83\u2009\u00b1\u20090.42 vs. 2.63\u2009\u00b1\u20090.61, 2.86\u2009\u00b1\u20090.38 vs. 2.73\u2009\u00b1\u20090.52, 2.80\u2009\u00b1\u20090.42 vs. 2.69\u2009\u00b1\u20090.53; and overall score: 4.42\u2009\u00b1\u20090.98 vs. 4.09\u2009\u00b1\u20091.19, 4.57\u2009\u00b1\u20090.75 vs. 4.26\u2009\u00b1\u20091.05, 4.48\u2009\u00b1\u20090.83 vs. 4.21\u2009\u00b1\u20091.03, respectively) in displaying the details and overall lesions than Gd\u2010DTPA (repeated measures analysis of variance [ANOVA], margin score:<jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.001, &lt; 0.0001, 0.006; interior score:<jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>&lt; 0.0001, 0.004, 0.009; and overall score:<jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.001, &lt; 0.0001, &lt; 0.0001, respectively). Subjective optimal image evaluation showed that the percentage of image assessed as \u201cgadobutrol was better than Gd\u2010DTPA (41.2\u201344.1%)\u201d was greater than that assessed as \u201cGd\u2010DTPA was better than gadobutrol (5.9\u201326.5%).\u201d Objective evaluation showed that at 3, 7, and 10 minutes the SNR (214.17\u2009\u00b1\u200985.70 vs. 199.57\u2009\u00b1\u200985.08, 214.80\u2009\u00b1\u200986.03 vs. 199.19\u2009\u00b1\u200984.74, and 213.83\u2009\u00b1\u200982.46 vs. 193.68\u2009\u00b1\u200979.59, respectively), CNR (68.64\u2009\u00b1\u200950.18 vs. 57.88\u2009\u00b1\u200951.06, 75.42\u2009\u00b1\u200953.19 vs. 63.74\u2009\u00b1\u200953.91, and 77.13\u2009\u00b1\u200951.86 vs. 63.21\u2009\u00b1\u200951.71, respectively), CE (101.76\u2009\u00b1\u200963.31 vs. 87.61\u2009\u00b1\u200964.85, 99.85\u2009\u00b1\u200961.56 vs. 85.08\u2009\u00b1\u200964.98, and 100.33\u2009\u00b1\u200958.63 vs. 82.73\u2009\u00b1\u200961.73, respectively), CBR (0.48\u2009\u00b1\u20090.32 vs. 0.40\u2009\u00b1\u20090.33, 0.54\u2009\u00b1\u20090.34 vs. 0.46\u2009\u00b1\u20090.35, and 0.56\u2009\u00b1\u20090.34 vs. 0.47\u2009\u00b1\u20090.34, respectively), and CER (0.99\u2009\u00b1\u20090.69 vs. 0.88\u2009\u00b1\u20090.81, 0.97\u2009\u00b1\u20090.68 vs. 0.86\u2009\u00b1\u20090.84, and 0.98\u2009\u00b1\u20090.65 vs. 0.85\u2009\u00b1\u20090.80, respectively) were all higher when using gadobutrol compared with Gd\u2010DTPA in the enhanced MR (repeated measures ANOVA, all<jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>&lt; 0.0001). On Gd\u2010DTPA enhanced images, 289, 292, and 292 lesions at 3, 7, and 10 minutes were detected by the two radiologists, while 295, 301, and 301 lesions were detected on gadobutrol\u2010enhanced images, respectively.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title><jats:p>Using a 3T<jats:italic>T<\/jats:italic><jats:sub>1<\/jats:sub>FLAIR sequence, gadobutrol (0.1 mmol\/kg body weight)\u2010enhanced MR resulted in more conspicuous brain metastases, and more metastases compared with the same dose of Gd\u2010DTPA. A delay time of 7 minutes for postcontrast MRI in patients with brain metastases is suggested in clinical practice.<\/jats:p><jats:p><jats:bold>Level of Evidence<\/jats:bold>: 2<\/jats:p><jats:p>J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1827\u20131834<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1002\/jmri.25491","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,11]],"date-time":"2016-10-11T18:13:05Z","timestamp":1476209585000},"page":"1827-1834","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":9,"title":["Diagnostic value of gadobutrol versus gadopentetate dimeglumine in enhanced MRI of brain metastases"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"45","author":[{"given":"Bing","family":"Fan","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Yichang Yiling Hospital Yichang China"},{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Meijiao","family":"Li","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Xiaoying","family":"Wang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yufeng","family":"Xu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Feiyu","family":"Li","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Laiyun","family":"Zhang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jian","family":"Jiang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yanyan","family":"Jiang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Radiology Peking University First Hospital Beijing China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_7_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s11912-011-0203-y"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2015.60.9503"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_4_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/jmri.24180"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_5_1","first-page":"335","article-title":"Experience with high\u2010dose gadolinium MR imaging in the evaluation of brain metastases","volume":"13","author":"Yuh WT","year":"1992","journal-title":"AJNR Am J Neuroradiol"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0b013e3182218dc3"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s40261-013-0066-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3174\/ajnr.A2010"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/02841850903095385"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1089\/jpm.2014.9417"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0b013e3181ed55b4"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_12_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0b013e31819ba711"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.09.3427"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/onc.2014.412"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1158\/0008-5472.CAN-14-2268"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/028418519503600318"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/10408444.2014.955568"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0b013e318263f128"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0000000000000036"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/1532-429X-15-97"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"8","DOI":"10.1186\/1470-7330-14-8","article-title":"The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of brain metastases: diagnosis to prognosis","volume":"14","author":"Zakaria R","year":"2014","journal-title":"Cancer Imaging"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0b013e318277b1aa"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/RLI.0b013e3181c02ed5"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.2301021085"}],"container-title":["Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fjmri.25491","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fjmri.25491","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/jmri.25491","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,6,19]],"date-time":"2024-06-19T21:41:43Z","timestamp":1718833303000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/jmri.25491"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,3]]},"references-count":23,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2017,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/jmri.25491"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/jmri.25491","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1053-1807","1522-2586"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1053-1807","type":"print"},{"value":"1522-2586","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,3]]}}}