Biomedical papers, 2012 (vol. 156), issue 3

Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2012, 156(3):229-235 | 10.5507/bp.2012.001

MR enterography with a new negative oral contrast solution containing maghemite nanoparticles

Ingrid Markovaa,f, Katarina Polakovab, Pavel Tucekc, Miroslav Mashland, Pavel Novake, Radek Zborilb, Miroslav Hermanf
a Department of Radiology, F.D.Roosevelt Faculty Hospital, nam. gen. Svobody 1, 975 17 Banska Bystrica, Slovak Republic
b Regional Center of Advanced Technologies and Materials, Department of Physical Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Palacky University Olomouc, Czech Republic
c Department of Geoinformatics, Faculty of Science, 17.listopadu 1192/12, 77146, Olomouc
d Center for Nanomaterial Research, Palacky University Olomouc
e Medihope s.r.o., Mathonova 291/1, 796 04 Prostejov
f Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University Olomouc

Aim: The aim of this study was to test an oral contrast solution with maghemite for the magnetic resonance imaging of small bowel diseases.

Patients and methods: The study sample included 3 cohorts: 17 healthy volunteers (group A), 22 patients with small bowel disease (group C). Both groups underwent MR enterography and 24 patients with small bowel disease (group B) underwent magnetic resonance cholecystopancreaticography. Various concentrations in 1000 ml vs 500 ml of experimental solution were tested. All cohorts completed questionnaires evaluating the solution characteristics and side-efects during and after drinking.

Results: A maghemite concentration of 800 mg /4 g bentonite in 1000 ml solution was sufficient for proper intraluminal lay-out. An experimental solution of 500 ml was sufficient for magnetic resonance cholecystopancreaticography and 1000 ml for MR enterography. There were no statistically significant differences between groups for taste, taste characteristic or appearance of the experimental solution. Side-effects experienced during drinking were: nausea (29.4%) and eructation (29.4%) in group A, in group B (42%) and diarrhoea (27.3%) in group C. Side-effects 2 h after drinking occured in group A (nausea 17.6%) and in group C (diarrhoea 47%). The best tolerance of experimental solution was found in group B with a higher median patient age than groups A and C. The experimental solution was evaluated more favorably in the older subjects (age over 50 years).

Conclusion: The experimental oral solution with maghemite was well tolerated in all 3 groups. Our study supports its use in magnetic resonance practice.

Keywords: MR enterography, maghemite, MRCP

Received: May 9, 2011; Accepted: January 3, 2012; Prepublished online: January 30, 2012; Published: September 1, 2012


References

  1. Maglinte DD, Siegelman ES, Kelvin FM. MR enteroclysis:the future of small-bowel imaging. Radiology 2000;215(3):639-41. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  2. Maccioni F, Bruni A, Viscido A, Colaiacomo MC, Cocco A, Montesani C,Caprilli R, Marini M. MR imaging in patiens with Crohn's disease: value of T2 - versus T1 - weighted gadolinium - enhanced MR sequences with use of an oral superparamagnetic contrast agent. Radiology 2006;238(2):517-30. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Prassopoulos P, Papanikolaou N, Grammatikakis J, Rousomoustakaki M,Mari T, Gourtsoyiannis N. MR enteroclysis imaging of Crohn's disease. Radiographics 2001;21:S61-72. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Bruining DH, Loftus EV. Crohn's disease clinical issues and treatment: what the radiologist needs to know and what the gastroenterologist wants to know. Abdom Imaging 2009;34:297-302. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Gourtsoyiannis N, Papanikolaou N, Grammatikakis J, Prassopoulos P. MR enteroclysis: technical considerations and clinical applications. Eur Radiol 2002;12(11):2651-8. Go to PubMed...
  6. Siddiki H, Fidler J. MR imaging of the small bowel in Crohn's disease. Eur J Radiol 2009;69:409-17. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  7. Giovagnoni A, Fabbri A, Maccioni F. Oral contrast agents in MRI of the gastrointestinal tract. Abdom Imaging 2002;27(4):367-75. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. Kluchova K, Zboril R, Tucek J, Pecova M, Zajoncova L, Safarik I, Mashlan M, Markova I, Jancik D, Sebela M, Bartonkova H, Bellesi V, Novak P, Petridis D. Superparamagnetic maghemit nanoparticles from solid - state synthesis - their functionalization towards peroral MRI contrast agent and magnetic carrier for trypsin immobilization. Biomaterials 2009;30:2855-63. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Patak MA, vonWeyman C, Froehlich JM. Small bowel MR imaging:1.5T versus 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2007;15(3):383-93. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  10. Wang YX, Hussain SM, Krestin GP. Superparamagnetic iron oxide contrast agents: physicochemical characteristics and applications in MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2001;11(11):2319-31. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Narin B, Aja W, Gohde S, Langhorst J,Akgoz H, Gerken G, Ruhm SG, Lauenstein TC. Combined small and large bowel MR imaging in patients with Crohn's disease: a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 2004;14:1535-42. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  12. Debatin JF, Patak MA. MRI of the small and large bowel. Eur J Radiol 1999;9:1523-34. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Rieber A, Aschoff A, Nussle K, Wruk D, Tomczak R, Reinshagen M, Adler G, Brambs HJ. MRI in the diagnosis of small bowel disease: use of positive and negative oral contrast media in combination with enteroclysis. Eur Radiol 2000;10(9):1377-82. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  14. Boraschi P, Braccini G, Gigoni R, Cartei F, Perri G. MR enteroclysis using iron oxide particles (ferristene) as an endoluminal contrast agent: an open phase III trial. Magn Reson Imaging 2004;22(8):1085-95. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...