ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Aisen, Alex M."

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparison of Dynamic Phase Enhancement of Hepatocellular Carcinoma using Gadoxetate Disodium versus Gadobenate Dimeglumine
    (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2015-07) Tirkes, Temel; Mehta, Peter; Aisen, Alex M.; Lall, Chandana; Akisik, Fatih; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, IU School of Medicine
    Objective: To determine the differences in enhancement of hepatocellular carcinoma during the first 5 minutes of postcontrast phases with gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) vs gadobenate dimeglumine. Methods: Ninety-five cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were examined on a 1.5-T scanner: 74 patients with Gd-BOPTA and 21 patients with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Same magnetic resonance imaging parameters were used for both groups. Gadoxetate isodium was administered at a dose of 0.025 mmol/kg; and Gd-BOPTA, at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg. Results: Mean contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) were similar in arterial (P = 0.3), portal venous (P = 0.1), and 5-minute delayed phases (P = 0.73). The CNRs of lesions in the Gd-EOB-DTPA group were lower in arterial phase, although this did not reach statistical significance. The CNRs of Gd-EOB-DTPA during the equilibrium phase was higher (P = 0.006). Conclusions: Gadoxetate isodium resulted in lower CNR during the arterial phase and higher CNR during the portal venous, equilibrium, and 5-minute delayed phases compared with gadobenate dimeglumine using the Food and Drug Administration–approved doses; however, overall, there was no statistical significance (P = 0.077).
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University