Quantitative and qualitative comparison of 0.025 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine for abdominal MRI at 1.5 T and 3 T MRI in patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rate

Highlights: • Efficacy and adequacy of enhancement using quarter dose gadobenate dimeglumine at 1.5 T was studied in patients with low GFR. • A dose of 0.025 mmol/kg of gadobenate dimeglumine at 1.5 T showed diagnostic enhancement quality in the majority of patients. • There were no significant differences between the qualitative perception of enhancement between 1.5 T and 3 T. • Patients who have renal impairment may still be able to receive GBCAs, while maintaining adequate enhancement at 1.5 T. - Abstract: Purpose: To investigate the efficacy and adequacy of enhancement employing 0.025 mmol/kg of gadobenate dimeglumine at 1.5 Tesla (T), and to compare the extent of enhancement of this dosage between 1.5 T and 3 T systems. Materials and methods: Our final population included 116 consecutive patients who underwent 0.025 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced abdominal MRI (78 men and 38 women; age, 64.1 ± 13.6 years). Sixty patients underwent imaging at 1.5 T and 56 patients underwent imaging at 3 T. Abdominal enhancement was evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. The quality of enhancement was compared using Mann–Whitney U test. The percentage of enhancement of each organ was compared using Student t-test. Results: The mean quality rating of enhancement was at least "good" in all phases of enhancement for both 1.5 T and 3 T. There was a non-significant trend to higher mean ratings at 3 T. The liver showed a 1.3-fold higher arterial-phase percentage of enhancement at 3 T (p = 0.0138). There were no differences between the mean relative enhancement of the pancreas and aorta throughout all phases of enhancement. The percentage of enhancement of the renal cortex was significantly higher at 3 T (p < 0.0001 to p = 0.0293). Conclusion: A dose of 0.025 mmol/kg of gadobenate dimeglumine demonstrates diagnostic enhancement in the majority of patients at 1.5 T, without significant differences on qualitative evaluation compared to 3 T