Feasibility of gadodiamide compared with dilute iodinated contrast material for imaging of the abdominal aorta and renal arteries.

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 abdominal aorta and renal vessels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five consecutive patients underwent digital subtraction arteriography of the abdominal aorta performed with equal volumes (32 mL) of either half-strength (300 mg/mL iodine) iodinated contrast material or full strength gadodiamide (0.11-0.25 mmol/kg) to evaluate the abdominal aorta and renal arteries. The contrast agent used was not known to the image readers. The abdominal aorta, left and right renal main renal artery, 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 for iodine and gadodiamide in the right main renal artery, respectively. The first order segmental branches of the right and left renal arteries were graded diagnostic 72% and 56% of the time, respectively, for dilute iodinated contrast material, and 40% and 28% of the time, respectively, for gadodiamide. 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 the 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 main renal arteries. However, images of the intrarenal branches are usually not diagnostic.