In MRI scanners, sections of the body are exposed to a strong
magnetic field causing primarily the hydrogen nuclei ("spins") of water in tissues to be polarized in the direction of the magnetic field. An intense
radiofrequency pulse is applied that tips the magnetization generated by the hydrogen nuclei in the direction of the receiver coil where the spin polarization can be detected. Random molecular rotational oscillations matching the resonance frequency of the nuclear spins provide the "relaxation" mechanisms that bring the net magnetization back to its equilibrium position in alignment with the applied magnetic field. The magnitude of the spin polarization detected by the receiver is used to form the MR image but decays with a characteristic time constant known as the
T1 relaxation time. Water protons in different tissues have different T1 values, which is one of the main sources of contrast in MR images. A contrast agent usually shortens, but in some instances increases, the value of T1 of nearby water protons thereby altering the contrast in the image.
Most clinically used MRI contrast agents work by shortening the T1 relaxation time of protons inside tissues via interactions with the nearby contrast agent. Thermally driven motion of the strongly paramagnetic metal ions in the contrast agent generate the oscillating magnetic fields that provide the relaxation mechanisms that enhance the rate of decay of the induced polarization. The systematic sampling of this polarization over the spatial region of the tissue being examined forms the basis for construction of the image.
MRI contrast agents may be administered by injection into the blood stream or orally, depending on the subject of interest. Oral administration is well suited to
gastrointestinal tract scans, while intravascular administration proves more useful for most other scans.
MRI contrast agents can be classified[2] by their:
Organ specific agents (gastrointestinal contrast agents and hepatobiliary contrast agents)
Active targeting/cell labeling agents (tumor-specific agents)
Responsive (smart or bioactivated) agents
pH-sensitive agents
Gadolinium(III)
Gadolinium(III) containing MRI contrast agents (often termed simply "gado" or "gad") are the most commonly used for enhancement of vessels in
MR angiography or for brain tumor enhancement associated with the degradation of the
blood–brain barrier (BBB).[3][4] Over 450 million doses have been administered worldwide from 1988 to 2017.[5] For large vessels such as the
aorta and its branches, the dose can be as low as 0.1 mmol/kg of body mass. Higher concentrations are often used for finer vasculature.[6] At much higher concentration, there is more T2 shortening effect of gadolinium, causing gadolinium brightness to be less than surrounding body tissues.[7] However at such concentration, it will cause greater toxicity to bodily tissues.[8]
Gd3+ chelates are hydrophilic and do not readily cross the intact blood–brain barrier. Thus, they are useful in enhancing lesions and tumors where the blood–brain barrier is compromised and the Gd(III) leaks out.[9][a] In the rest of the body, the Gd3+ initially remains in the circulation but then distributes into the interstitial space or is eliminated by the
kidneys.
Available gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) (brand names, approved for human use by
EMA[10][when?] and by the
FDA in 1988;[11][12] (standard dose[13])):
As a free solubilized aqueous ion, gadolinium(III) is highly toxic, but
chelated compound are generally regarded as safe enough to be administered. Free Gd3+ has a
median lethal dose of 0.34 mmol/kg (IV, mouse)[17] or 100–200 mg/kg, but the
LD50 is increased by a factor of 31 times[18] when Gd3+ is chelated.[19]
The spectrum of adverse drug reactions is greater with gadolinium-based contrast agents than with iodinated contrast agents (
radiocontrast agents).[20]
The use of Gd3+ chelates in persons with acute or chronic kidney disease can cause
nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF),[21][22][23] a rare but severe systemic disease resembling
scleromyxedema and to some extent
scleroderma. It may occur months after contrast injection.[24] Patients with deteriorated
kidney function are more at risk for NSF, with dialysis patients being more at risk than patients with
chronic kidney disease.[25][26] NSF can be caused by linear and macrocyclic[27][28] (macrocyclic ionic compounds have been found the least likely to release the Gd3+),[29][21] gadolinium-containing MRI contrast agents although much more frequently by linear.
Gadolinium has been found to remain in the brain, heart muscle, kidney, liver, and other organs after one or more injections of a linear or macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agents, even after a prolonged period of time.[30][31] The amount differs with the presence of kidney injury at the moment of injection, the
molecular geometry of the ligand, and the dose administered.[citation needed]
While NSF is a severe form of disease, gadolinium deposition disease (GDD) is a mild variant with pain (e.g. headache), fatigue, and / or gadolinium depositions.[32]
In vitro studies have found gadolinium-based contrast agents to be
neurotoxic,[33] and a study found signal intensity in the
dentate nucleus of MRI (indicative of gadolinium deposition) to be correlated with lower verbal fluency.[34]Confusion is often reported as a possible clinical symptom.[33] The FDA has asked doctors to limit the use of gadolinium contrast agents to examinations where necessary information is obtained only through its use.[35]Intrathecal injections of doses higher than 1 mmol are associated with severe neurological complications and can lead to death.[36][37] The
glymphatic system could be the main access of GBCA to the brain in intravenous injection.[38][39]
Continuing evidence of the retention of gadolinium in brain and other tissues following exposure to gadolinium containing contrast media, has led to a safety review by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) which led the
EMA to suspend linear gadolinium-based media, in which Gd3+ has a lower binding affinity, in 2017.[16]
In the United States, the research has led the
FDA to revise its class warnings for all gadolinium-based contrast media. It is advised that the use of gadolinium-based media is based on careful consideration of the retention characteristics of the contrast. Extra care being taken in patients requiring multiple lifetime doses, pregnant, and paediatric patients, and patients with inflammatory conditions. Minimizing repeated GBCA imaging studies when possible, particularly closely spaced MRI studies. However, do not avoid or defer necessary GBCA MRI scans.[40]
In December 2017, the FDA announced in a drug safety communication it is requiring these new warnings to be included on all GBCAs. The FDA also called for increased patient education and requiring gadolinium contrast vendors to conduct additional animal and clinical studies to assess the safety of these agents.[41]
The
French health authority recommends to use the lowest possible dose of a GBCA and only when essential diagnostic information cannot be obtained without it.[42]
The
World Health Organization issued a restriction on use of several gadolinium contrast agents in November 2009 stating that "High-risk gadolinium-containing contrast agents (
Optimark,
Omniscan,
Magnevist,
Magnegita, and
Gado-MRT ratiopharm) are contraindicated in patients with severe kidney problems, in patients who are scheduled for or have recently received a liver transplant, and in newborn babies up to four weeks of age."[43]
In
magnetic resonance imaging in pregnancy, gadolinium contrast agents in the first trimester is associated with a slightly increased risk of a childhood diagnosis of several forms of
rheumatism,
inflammatory disorders, or infiltrative
skin conditions, according to a retrospective study including 397 infants prenatally exposed to gadolinium contrast.[44] In the second and third trimester, gadolinium contrast is associated with a slightly increased risk of stillbirth or neonatal death, by the same study.[44]
Two types of
iron oxide contrast agents exist:
superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) and ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide (USPIO). These contrast agents consist of suspended
colloids of iron oxide
nanoparticles and when injected during imaging reduce the T2 signals of absorbing tissues. SPIO and USPIO contrast agents have been used successfully in some instances for liver lesion evaluation.[45][46]
Feridex I.V. (also known as Endorem and ferumoxides). This product was discontinued by AMAG Pharma in November 2008.[47]
Resovist (also known as Cliavist). This was approved for the European market in 2001, but production was abandoned in 2009.[48]
Sinerem (also known as Combidex). Guerbet withdrew the marketing authorization application for this product in 2007.[49]
Lumirem (also known as Gastromark). Gastromark was approved by the FDA in 1996[50] and was discontinued by its manufacturer in 2012.[51][52]
Clariscan (also known as PEG-fero, Feruglose, and NC100150). This iron based contrast agent was never commercially launched and its development was discontinued in early 2000s due to safety concerns.[53] In 2017 GE Healthcare launched a macrocyclic extracellular gadolinium based contrast agent containing gadoteric acid as gadoterate meglumine under the trade name Clariscan.[54]
Iron platinum: superparamagnetic
Superparamagnetic iron–platinum particles (SIPPs) have been reported and had significantly better T2 relaxivities compared with the more common
iron oxide nanoparticles. SIPPs were also encapsulated with
phospholipids to create multifunctional SIPP stealth immuno
micelles that specifically targeted human prostate cancer cells.[55] These are, however, investigational agents which have not yet been tried in humans. In a recent study, multifunctional SIPP micelles were synthesized and conjugated to a monoclonal antibody against prostate-specific membrane antigen.[55] The complex specifically targeted human prostate cancer cells in vitro, and these results suggest that SIPPs may have a role in the future as tumor-specific contrast agents.[citation needed]
Manganese
Manganese(II) chelates such as Mn-DPDP (
mangafodipir) enhance the T1 signal.[56] The chelate dissociates in vivo into manganese and DPDP; the manganese is excreted in
bile, while DPDP is eliminated via kidney filtration.[57] Mangafodipir has been used in human neuroimaging clinical trials, including for neurodegenerative diseases such as
multiple sclerosis.[58][59] Manganese(II) ions are often used as a contrast agent in animal studies, often called MEMRI (manganese-enhanced MRI).[60] Because Mn2+ ions can enter cells through calcium transport channels, it has been used for functional brain imaging.[61]
Unlike the other well-studied iron oxide-based nanoparticles, research on Mn-based nanoparticles is at a relatively early stage.[62]
Oral administration
A wide variety of oral contrast agents can enhance images of the
gastrointestinal tract. They include gadolinium and manganese chelates, or iron salts for T1 signal enhancement. SPIO,
barium sulfate, air and clay have been used to lower T2 signal. Natural products with high manganese concentration such as
blueberry and
green tea can also be used for T1 increasing contrast enhancement.[63]
Perflubron, a type of
perfluorocarbon, has been used as a gastrointestinal MRI contrast agent for pediatric imaging.[64] This contrast agent works by reducing the number of hydrogen ions in a body cavity, thus causing it to appear dark in the images.
Newer research suggests the possibility of protein based contrast agents, based on the abilities of some
amino acids to bind with gadolinium.[65][66][67][68]
^
"Disruption of the
BBB tight junctions is thought to be an early or initiating event in new
MS lesion formation. T1-w
MRI in combination with low
molecular weight gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCA) is most typically used to characterize
BBB compromise in
MS. MRI GBCAs do not readily cross cellular membranes, are avid extracellular space markers, and are thought to enter the brain from the blood by diffusive transport between
endothelial cells (ie, via intercellular pathways). Although it is widely believed that the MRI GBCAs do not cross the BBB under homeostatic conditions, there is substantial evidence that they do, albeit with very small volume transfer rate constants." — Bagnato, Gauthier, Laule, et al. (2020)[9]
References
^
Rinck, Peter A. (2024). "Magnetic resonance contrast agents". Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. A critical introduction (14th ed.). TRTF – The Round Table Foundation / EMRF – European Magnetic Resonance Forum.
"Magnetic resonance contrast agents". Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (www.magnetic-resonance.org) (e-Textbook).
^Tircsó, Gyulia; Molńar, Enricő; Csupász, Tibor; Garda, Zoltan; Botár, Richárd; Kálmán, Ferenc K.; Kovács, Zoltan; Brücher, Ernő; Tóth, Imre (2021). "Chapter 2. Gadolinium(III)-based contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging: A re-appraisal". Metal Ions in Bio-Imaging Techniques. Springer. pp. 39–70.
doi:
10.1515/9783110685701-008.
S2CID233702931.
^McLeod, Shauanna M.; Mead, Thomas J. (2021). "Chapter 12. Magnetic resonance theranostics: An overview of gadolinium(II)-based strategies and magnetic particle imaging". Metal Ions in Bio-Imaging Techniques. Springer. pp. 347–370.
doi:
10.1515/9783110685701-018.
S2CID233710460.
^Penfield, Jeffrey G.; Reilly, Robert F. (2007). "What nephrologists need to know about gadolinium". Nature Clinical Practice Nephrology. 3 (12): 654–668.
doi:
10.1038/ncpneph0660.
PMID18033225.
S2CID22435496.
^Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2007). "Nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy associated with exposure to gadolinium-containing contrast agents". Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). 56 (7).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): 137–141.
PMID17318112.
^Thomsen, H.S.; Morcos, S.K.; Dawson, P. (2006). "Is there a causal relation between the administration of gadolinium based contrast media and the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF)?". Clinical Radiology. 61 (11): 905–906.
doi:
10.1016/j.crad.2006.09.003.
PMID17018301.
^Kanal, E.; Barkovich, A.J.; Bell, C.; Borgstede, J.P.; Bradley, W.G.; Froelich, J.W.; et al. (ACR Blue Ribbon Panel on MR Safety) (2007). "ACR Guidance Document for Safe MR Practices: 2007". American Journal of Roentgenology. 188 (6): 1447–1474.
doi:
10.2214/AJR.06.1616.
PMID17515363.
^Boehm IB (2022). "Gadolinium deposition disease (GDD): Does the missing link exist? – A suggested pathologic model". European Journal of Internal Medicine. 105 (11): 118–120.
doi:
10.1016/j.ejim.2022.07.008.
PMID35864076.
S2CID250648810.
^
abMervak, Benjamin M.; Altun, Ersan; McGinty, Katrina A.; Hyslop, W. Brian; Semelka, Richard C.; Burke, Lauren M. (2019). "MRI in pregnancy: Indications and practical considerations". Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 49 (3): 621–631.
doi:
10.1002/jmri.26317.
ISSN1053-1807.
PMID30701610.
S2CID73412175.
^Nakamura, Hiroshi; Ito, Naoki; Kotake, Fumio; Mizokami, Yuji; Matsuoka, Takeshi (2000). "Tumor-detecting capacity and clinical usefulness of SPIO-MRI in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma". Journal of Gastroenterology. 35 (11): 849–855.
doi:
10.1007/s005350070022.
PMID11085494.
S2CID1037632.
^
abLacerda, Sara; Ndiaye, Daouda; Tóth, Éva (2021). "Chapter 3. Manganese Complexes as Contrast Agents for Magnetic Resonance Imaging". Metal Ions in Bio-Imaging Techniques. Springer. pp. 71–99.
doi:
10.1515/9783110685701-009.
S2CID233682771.
^Harisinghani, Mukesh G.; Jhaveri, Kartik S.; Weissleder, Ralph; Schima, Wolfgang; Saini, Sanjay; Hahn, Peter F.; Mueller, Peter R. (2001). "MRI contrast agents for evaluating focal hepatic lesions". Clinical Radiology. 56 (9): 714–725.
doi:
10.1053/crad.2001.0764.
PMID11585393.
^Lin, Yi-Jen; Koretsky, Alan P. (1997). "Manganese ion enhances T1-weighted MRI during brain activation: An approach to direct imaging of brain function". Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 38 (3): 378–388.
doi:
10.1002/mrm.1910380305.
PMID9339438.
S2CID25703430.
^Xue, Shenghui; Qiao, Jingjuan; Hubbard, Kendra; White, Natalie; Wei, Lixia; Li, Shunyi; et al. (2014). "Design of ProCAs (protein-based Gd3+ MRI contrast agents) with high dose efficiency and capability for molecular imaging of cancer biomarkers". Medicinal Research Reviews. 34 (5): 1070–1099.
doi:
10.1002/med.21313.
PMID24615853.
S2CID42641594.