Skip to main content
Log in

Randomised double blind trial of the safety and efficacy of two gadolinium complexes (Gd-DTPA and Gd-DOTA)

  • Diagnostic Neuroradiology
  • Published:
Neuroradiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The main difference between macrocyclic Gd-DOTA and linear Gd-DTPA complexes is the greater stability of the former which theoretically might reduce biological interactions in man. To evaluate the clinical relevance of this property, 300 unselected neurological patients were included in a randomised double-blind comparison involving five European centres, focused mainly on the tolerance of these two contrast media. Clinical tolerance was assessed immediatley after the procedure and 24 h later. Adverse events were found with a similar frequency in the two groups (17.3% for Gd-DOTA and 19.3% for Gd-DTPA). Minor neurological symptoms were the most frequent (48.6%) headache being the most common (29.2% of adverse events). No difference in efficacy was found.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Armitage FE, Richardson DE, Li KCP (1990) Polymeric contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging: synthesis and characterization of gadolinium diethylenetriaminepenta-acetic acid conjugated to polysaccharides. Bioconj Chem 1: 365–374

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bonnemain B, Lautrou J, Meyer D, Doucet D (1987) Produits de contraste non radiologiques (IRM). In: Amiel M, Ducassou D, Frija G, Grenier P (eds) Medical imaging research. INSERM, Paris, pp 61–67

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brücher E, Lanrenczy G (1981) Aminopolycarboxylates of rare earths. VIII. Kinetic study of exchange reactions between Eu3+ ions and lanthanide (III) diethylenetriaminepentaacetate complexes. J Inorg Nucl Chem 43: 2089–2096

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chang CA (1991) Lanthanide magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents: thermodynamic, kinetic and structural properites of lanthanide (III) macrocyclic complexes. Eur J Solid State Inorg 28: 237–244

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fritz T, Unger E, Wilson-Sanders S, Ahkong QF, Tilcock C (1991) Detailed toxicity studies of liposomal gadolinium DTPA. Invest Radiol 26: 960–968

    Google Scholar 

  6. Golstein H, Kashanian FK, Blumetti RF et al (1990) Safety assessment of gadopentetate dimeglumine in US clinical trials. Radiology 174: 17–23

    Google Scholar 

  7. Haler TJ (1979) Toxicity. In: Gschneider KA Jr, Eyring L (eds) Handbook on the physics and chemistry of rare earths. North Holland, Amsterdam, 40: 553–585

    Google Scholar 

  8. Harbur OL (1991) Generalized seizure after IV administration of gadopentetate dimeglumine. AJNR 12: 666

    Google Scholar 

  9. International application files. International date Larobatoire Guerbet, 1989

  10. Laflore J, Golstein H, Rogan R et al (1989) A prospective evaluation of adverse experiences following the administration of Magnevist (gadopentetate dimeglumine) injection. In: SMRM August 12–18, Amsterdam, p 1067

  11. Lauffer RB (1990) Magnetic resonance contrast media: principles and progress. Magn Reson Q 6: 2: 65–84

    Google Scholar 

  12. Meyer D, Schaefer M, Bonnemain B (1988) Gd-DOTA, a potential MRI contrast agent: current status of physicochemical knowledge. Invest Radiol 23: 232–235

    Google Scholar 

  13. Neiss AC, Le Mignon MM, Vitry A, Caillé JM (1991) Efficacité et tolérance du DOTA-Gd lors d'une unquête multicentrique européenne: résultats préliminaires sur 4169 cas. Rev Im Méd 3: 383–387

    Google Scholar 

  14. Niendorf HP, Dinger JC, Hausteins J et al (1991) Tolerance data of Gd-DTPA: a review. Europ J Radiol 13: 15–20

    Google Scholar 

  15. Salonen ALM (1990) Case of anaphylaxis and four cases of allergic reaction following Gd-DTPA administration. J Comput Assist Tomogr 4: 912–913

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schaefer M, Meyer D, Beauté S, Doucet D (1991) A new macrocyclic MRI contrast agent; Gd-MCTA complex. Magn Reson Med 22: 238–241

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sieving PF, Watson AD, Rocklage SM (1990) Preparation and characterization of paramagnetic polychelates and their protein conjugates. Bioconj Chem 1: 65–71

    Google Scholar 

  18. Tishler S, Hoffman JC (1990) Anaphylactoid reactions to IV gadopentetate dimeglumine. AJNR 11: 1167

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tweedle MR, Hagan JJ, Kumar K, Mantha S, Chang CA (1991) Reaction of gadolinium chelates with endogenously available ions. Magn Reson Imag 9: 409–415

    Google Scholar 

  20. Unger EC, Fritz TA, Tilcock C, New TE (1991) Clearance of liposomal gadolinium: in vivo decomplexation. JMRI 1: 689–693

    Google Scholar 

  21. Weiss KL (1990) Severe anaphylactoid reaction after IV Gd-DTPA. Magn Reson Imag 8: 817–818

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wolf GL (1989) Current status of MRI imaging. Contrast agents: special report. Radiology 172: 709–710

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brugiores, P., Gaston, A., Degryse, H.R. et al. Randomised double blind trial of the safety and efficacy of two gadolinium complexes (Gd-DTPA and Gd-DOTA). Neuroradiology 36, 27–30 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00599189

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00599189

Key words

Navigation