Advertisement

Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 48, Issue 5, pp 686–693 | Cite as

Changes in signal intensity in the dentate nucleus at unenhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging depending on class of previously used gadolinium-based contrast agent

  • Eileen Kasper
  • Haemi Phaedra Schemuth
  • Samantha Horry
  • Sonja Kinner
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Signal increase on T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the dentate nucleus has been reported in adults after multiple injections of gadolinium-based contrast agents. Linear contrast agents are more prone to cause this increase. Studies in children are still rare and focus mostly on the analysis of one single agent.

Objective

To compare signal intensity chances in children after more than four injections of either only linear or only macrocyclic contrast agents.

Materials and methods

Seventy children (examined from October 2001 to February 2016) were included in this retrospective study. Signal intensities in the dentate nucleus and pons were measured on non-enhanced T1-weighted images from the first and last MRI scans. A two-sample t-test compared the dentate nucleus-to-pons signal intensity ratio differences for linear versus macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent applications and also the number of applications (4-8, 9-12 or >12). Patients’ charts were analysed to evaluate potentially associated neurological symptoms.

Results

Patients had contrast-enhanced MRI using either only linear (n=16) or only macrocyclic (n=54) gadolinium-based contrast agents. In patients with >12 injections, dentate nucleus-to-pons signal intensity ratio was statistically different concerning the contrast agent class (0.16±0.125 for macrocyclic vs. 0.0005±0.13 for linear agents). For linear agents, a statistically significant increase was found between 4-8 injections (-0.051±0.087) and >12 injections (0.16±0.125). No neurological symptoms were recorded in patients with signal changes.

Conclusion

Multiple injections of linear gadolinium-based contrast agents lead to a signal increase of the dentate nucleus in children. Signal intensity increases depend on the number of injections of linear contrast agents.

Keywords

Brain Children Dentate nucleus Gadolinium deposition Gadolinium-based contrast agents Pons Signal intensity ratio 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None

References

  1. 1.
    Kanda T, Ishii K, Kawaguchi H et al (2014) High signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: Relationship with increasing cumulative dose of a gadolinium-based contrast material. Radiology 270:834–841CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frenzel T, Lengsfeld P, Schirmer H et al (2008) Stability of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents in human serum at 37 degrees C. Investig Radiol 43:817–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Robert P, Violas X, Grand S et al (2016) Linear gadolinium-based contrast agents are associated with brain gadolinium retention in healthy rats. Investig Radiol 51:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jost G, Lenhard DC, Sieber MA et al (2016) Signal increase on unenhanced T1-weighted images in the rat brain after repeated, extended doses of gadolinium-based contrast agents: comparison of linear and macrocyclic agents. Investig Radiol 51:83–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Errante Y, Cirimele V, Mallio CA et al (2014) Progressive increase of T1 signal intensity of the dentate nucleus on unenhanced magnetic resonance images is associated with cumulative doses of intravenously administered gadodiamide in patients with normal renal function, suggesting dechelation. Investig Radiol 49:685–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Quattrocchi CC, Mallio CA, Errante Y et al (2015) Gadodiamide and dentate nucleus T1 hyperintensity in patients with meningioma evaluated by multiple follow-up contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance examinations with no systemic interval therapy. Investig Radiol 50:470–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adin ME, Kleinberg L, Vaidya D et al (2015) Hyperintense dentate nuclei on T1-weighted MRI: relation to repeat gadolinium administration. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36:1859–1865CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Miller JH, Hu HH, Pokorney A et al (2015) MRI brain signal intensity changes of a child during the course of 35 gadolinium contrast examinations. Pediatrics 136:e1637–e1640CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roberts DR, Chatterjee AR, Yazdani M et al (2016) Pediatric patients demonstrate progressive T1-weighted hyperintensity in the dentate nucleus following multiple doses of gadolinium-based contrast agent. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 37:2340–2347CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roberts DR, Holden KR (2015) Progressive increase of T1 signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images in the pediatric brain exposed to multiple doses of gadolinium contrast. Brain and Development 38:331–336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flood TF, Stence NV, Maloney JA, Mirsky DM (2017) Pediatric brain: repeated exposure to linear gadolinium-based contrast material is associated with increased signal intensity at unenhanced T1-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 282:222–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu HH, Pokorney A, Towbin RB, Miller JH (2016) Increased signal intensities in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted images: evidence in children undergoing multiple gadolinium MRI exams. Pediatr Radiol 46:1590–1598CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanda T, Osawa M, Oba H et al (2015) High signal intensity in dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: association with linear versus macrocyclic gadolinium chelate administration. Radiology 275:803–809CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Radbruch A, Weberling LD, Kieslich PJ et al (2015) Gadolinium retention in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus is dependent on the class of contrast agent. Radiology 275:783–791CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cao Y, Huang DQ, Shih G, Prince MR (2015) Signal change in the dentate nucleus on T1-weighted MR images after multiple administrations of gadopentetate dimeglumine versus gadobutrol. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:414–419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Radbruch A, Haase R, Kieslich PJ et al (2017) No signal intensity increase in the dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images after more than 20 serial injections of macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agents. Radiology 282:699–707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stein J, Schettler T, Wallinga D, Valenti M (2002) In harm's way: toxic threats to child development. J Dev Behav Pediatr 23:S13–S22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Radbruch A, Haase R, Kickingereder P et al (2017) Pediatric brain: no increased signal intensity in the dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images after consecutive exposure to a macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent. Radiology 283:828–836CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rossi Espagnet MC, Bernardi B, Pasquini L et al (2017) Signal intensity at unenhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance in the globus pallidus and dentate nucleus after serial administrations of a macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent in children. Pediatr Radiol 47:1345–1352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schneider GK, Stroeder J, Roditi G et al (2017) T1 signal measurements in pediatric brain: findings after multiple exposures to gadobenate dimeglumine for imaging of nonneurologic disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 38:1799–1806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McDonald JS, McDonald RJ, Jentoft ME et al (2017) Intracranial gadolinium deposition following gadodiamide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients: a case-control study. JAMA Pediatr 171:705–707CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Frenzel T, Apte C, Jost G et al (2017) Quantification and assessment of the chemical form of residual gadolinium in the brain after repeated administration of gadolinium-based contrast agents: comparative study in rats. Investig Radiol 52:396–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Radbruch A (2016) Are some agents less likely to deposit gadolinium in the brain? Magn Reson Imaging 34:1351–1354CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Murata N, Gonzalez-Cuyar LF, Murata K et al (2016) Macrocyclic and other non-group 1 gadolinium contrast agents deposit low levels of gadolinium in brain and bone tissue: preliminary results from 9 patients with normal renal function. Investig Radiol 51:447–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ramalho J, Ramalho M, AlObaidy M et al (2016) T1 signal-intensity increase in the dentate nucleus after multiple exposures to gadodiamide: intraindividual comparison between 2 commonly used sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 37:1427–1431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tibussek D, Rademacher C, Caspers J, Turowski B, Schaper J, Antoch G, Klee D (2017) Gadolinium Brain Deposition after Macrocyclic Gadolinium Administration: A Pediatric Case-Control Study. Radiology 161151.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017161151

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and NeuroradiologyUniversity Hospital EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations