Dj. Spinosa et al., Feasibility of gadodiamide compared with dilute iodinated contrast material for imaging of the abdominal aorta and renal arteries, J VAS INT R, 11(6), 2000, pp. 733-737
PURPOSE: To determine the quality of digital abdominal angiograms obtained
with use of full-strength, intra-arterial gadodiamide compared with similar
volumes of half-strength iodinated contrast material for evaluating the ab
dominal aorta and renal vessels.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five consecutive patients underwent digital s
ubtraction arteriography of the abdominal aorta performed with equal volume
s (32 mL) of either half-strength (300 mg/mL iodine) iodinated contrast mat
erial or full strength gadodiamide (0.11-0.25 mmol/kg) to evaluate the abdo
minal aorta and renal arteries. The contrast agent used was not known to th
e image readers. The abdominal aorta, left and right renal main renal arter
y, and first and second order segmental branches were graded separately as
diagnostic or nondiagnostic by four angiographers,
RESULTS: Images of the abdominal aorta were diagnostic 100% of the time for
iodine and gadodiamide, 76% and 80% diagnostic for iodine and gadodiamide
in the left main renal artery, respectively; and 100% and 80% diagnostic fo
r iodine and gadodiamide in the right main renal artery, respectively. The
first order segmental branches of the sight and left renal arteries were gr
aded diagnostic 72% and 56% of the time, respectively, for dilute iodinated
contrast material, and 40% and 28% of the time, respectively, for gadodiam
ide, The second order segmental branches of the right and left kidney were
graded diagnostic 24% of the time for iodinated contrast and 8% and 4% of t
he time, respectively, for gadodiamide.
CONCLUSION: Full-strength, intra-arterial gadodiamide at doses smaller than
0.3 mmol/kg can produce diagnostic images of the abdominal aorta and maim
renal arteries. However, images of the intrarenal branches are usually not
diagnostic.