rentradВестник рентгенологии и радиологииJournal of radiology and nuclear medicine0042-46762619-0478Limited Liability Company "LUCHEVAYA DIAGNOSTIKA", Russian Association of Radiologists10.20862/0042-4676-2020-101-4-235-243rentrad-574Research ArticleОБЗОРЫREVIEWSК вопросу о стандартизации МРТ-исследований с использованием автоматического инъектора для введения магнитно-резонансных контрастных средствStandardization of MRI Studies Using an Automatic Magnetic Resonance Contrast Agent Injectorhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-7885-9024ФокинВ. А.FokinV. A.

д. м. н, профессор кафедры лучевой диагностики и медицинской визуализации, заведующий отделом лучевой диагностики

ул. Аккуратова, 2, Санкт-Петербург, 197341, Российская Федерация

ul. Akkuratova, 2, Saint-Petersburg, 197341, Russian Federation

vladfokin@mail.ruФГБУ «Национальный медицинский исследовательский центр им В.А. Алмазова» Минздрава РоссииРоссияAlmazov National Medical Research Center, Russian Ministry of HealthRussian Federation2020050920201014235243Copyright © Фокин В.А., 20202020Фокин В.А.Fokin V.A.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.russianradiology.ru/jour/article/view/574автоматический инъекторконтрастное усилениемагнитно-резонансная перфузиядинамическое контрастное усилениеобзорautomatic injectorcontrast enhancementmagnetic resonance perfusiondynamic contrast enhancementreviewПубликация подготовлена при поддержке АО «БАЙЕР».ReferencesEndrikat J, Barbati R, Scarpa M, Jost G, Uber AE 3rd. Accuracy and repeatability of automated injector versus manual administration of an MRI contrast agent – results of a laboratory study. Invest Radiol. 2018; 53(1): 1–5. doi: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000403Endrikat J, Barbati R, Scarpa M, Jost G, Uber AE 3rd. Accuracy and repeatability of automated injector versus manual administration of an MRI contrast agent – results of a laboratory study. Invest Radiol. 2018; 53(1): 1–5. doi: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000403Hubbard C, Kocher MR, Hardie AD. The use of MRI digital subtraction technique in the diagnosis of traumatic pancreatic injury. Radiol Case Rep. 2019; 14(5): 639–45. doi: 10.1016/j.radcr.2019.03.003Hubbard C, Kocher MR, Hardie AD. The use of MRI digital subtraction technique in the diagnosis of traumatic pancreatic injury. Radiol Case Rep. 2019; 14(5): 639–45. doi: 10.1016/j.radcr.2019.03.003Papini GD, Di Leo G, Tritella S, Nano G, Cotticelli B, Clemente C, et al. Evaluation of inflammatory status of atherosclerotic carotid plaque before thromboendarterectomy using delayed contrast-enhanced subtracted images after magnetic resonance angiography. Eur J Radiol. 2011; 80(3): e373-e380. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.029Papini GD, Di Leo G, Tritella S, Nano G, Cotticelli B, Clemente C, et al. Evaluation of inflammatory status of atherosclerotic carotid plaque before thromboendarterectomy using delayed contrast-enhanced subtracted images after magnetic resonance angiography. Eur J Radiol. 2011; 80(3): e373-e380. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.029Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, Morakkabati-Spitz N, Wardelmann E, Fimmers R, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(33): 8469–76. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.00.4960Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, Morakkabati-Spitz N, Wardelmann E, Fimmers R, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(33): 8469–76. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.00.4960Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, Easton DF, Eeles RA, Evans DG, et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet. 2005; 365(9473): 1769–78. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66481-1Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, Easton DF, Eeles RA, Evans DG, et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet. 2005; 365(9473): 1769–78. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66481-1Bakker MF, de Lange SV, Pijnappel RM, Mann RM, Peeters PH, Monninkhof EM, et al. Supplemental MRI screening for women with extremely dense breast tissue. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381(22): 2091–102. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1903986Bakker MF, de Lange SV, Pijnappel RM, Mann RM, Peeters PH, Monninkhof EM, et al. Supplemental MRI screening for women with extremely dense breast tissue. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381(22): 2091–102. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1903986Клинические рекомендации. Рак молочной железы. Министерство здравоохранения Российской Федерации. 2020. URL: http: //cr.rosminzdrav.ru/#!/schema/236 (дата обращения 17.07.2020).Clinical guidelines. Breast cancer. Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation. 2020. Available at: http: //cr.rosminzdrav.ru/#!/schema/236 (accessed July 17, 2020) (in Russian).Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B, Decker T, Federico M, Gilbert FJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer. 2010; 46(8): 1296–316. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B, Decker T, Federico M, Gilbert FJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer. 2010; 46(8): 1296–316. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Hendrick RE, Helvie MA, Moy L, Monsees B, et al. Breast cancer screening for average- risk women: recommendations from the ACR commission on breast imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017; 14(9): 1137–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.06.001Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Hendrick RE, Helvie MA, Moy L, Monsees B, et al. Breast cancer screening for average- risk women: recommendations from the ACR commission on breast imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017; 14(9): 1137–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.06.001Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Moy L, Niell B, Monsees B, Sickles EA. Breast cancer screening in women at higher- thanaverage risk: recommendations from the ACR. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018; 15(3 Pt A): 408–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.034Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Moy L, Niell B, Monsees B, Sickles EA. Breast cancer screening in women at higher- thanaverage risk: recommendations from the ACR. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018; 15(3 Pt A): 408–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.034D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA. ACR BI-RADS atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013. Available at: https: //www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Reporting-and-Data-Systems/Bi-Rads (accessed July 17, 2020)D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA. ACR BI-RADS atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013. Available at: https: //www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Reporting-and-Data-Systems/Bi-Rads (accessed July 17, 2020)Neri E, Bali MA, Ba-Ssalamah A, Boraschi P, Brancatelli G, Caseiro Alves F, et al. ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents. Eur Radiol. 2016; 26(4): 921–31. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3900-3Neri E, Bali MA, Ba-Ssalamah A, Boraschi P, Brancatelli G, Caseiro Alves F, et al. ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents. Eur Radiol. 2016; 26(4): 921–31. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3900-3Zech CJ, Ba-Ssalamah A, Berg T, Chandarana H, Chau GY, Grazioli L, et al. Consensus report from the 8th international forum for liver magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2020; 30(1): 370–82. doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06369-4Zech CJ, Ba-Ssalamah A, Berg T, Chandarana H, Chau GY, Grazioli L, et al. Consensus report from the 8th international forum for liver magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2020; 30(1): 370–82. doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06369-4Choi JY, Lee JM, Sirlin CB. CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: part I. Development, growth, and spread: key pathologic and imaging aspects. Radiology. 2014; 272(3): 635–54. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132361Choi JY, Lee JM, Sirlin CB. CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: part I. Development, growth, and spread: key pathologic and imaging aspects. Radiology. 2014; 272(3): 635–54. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132361van Montfoort JE, Stieger B, Meijer DK, Weinmann HJ, Meier PJ, Fattinger KE. Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent gadoxetate by the organic anion transporting polypeptide OATP1. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1999; 290(1): 153–7.van Montfoort JE, Stieger B, Meijer DK, Weinmann HJ, Meier PJ, Fattinger KE. Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent gadoxetate by the organic anion transporting polypeptide OATP1. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1999; 290(1): 153–7.Seale MK, Catalano OA, Saini S, Hahn PF, Sahani DV. Hepatobiliary-specific MR contrast agents: role in imaging the liver and biliary tree. Radiographics. 2009; 29(6): 1725–48. doi: 10.1148/rg.296095515Seale MK, Catalano OA, Saini S, Hahn PF, Sahani DV. Hepatobiliary-specific MR contrast agents: role in imaging the liver and biliary tree. Radiographics. 2009; 29(6): 1725–48. doi: 10.1148/rg.296095515Brodsky EK, Bultman EM, Johnson KM, Horng DE, Schelman WR, Block WF, Reeder SB. High-spatial and high-temporal resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging of the liver with time-resolved three-dimensional radial MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2014; 71(3): 934–41. doi: 10.1002/mrm.24727Brodsky EK, Bultman EM, Johnson KM, Horng DE, Schelman WR, Block WF, Reeder SB. High-spatial and high-temporal resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging of the liver with time-resolved three-dimensional radial MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2014; 71(3): 934–41. doi: 10.1002/mrm.24727Welker K, Boxerman J, Kalnin XA, Kaufmann T, Shiroishi M, Wintermark M. ASFNR recommendations for clinical performance of MR dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging of the brain. Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36(6): E41–51. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4341Welker K, Boxerman J, Kalnin XA, Kaufmann T, Shiroishi M, Wintermark M. ASFNR recommendations for clinical performance of MR dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion imaging of the brain. Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36(6): E41–51. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4341Essig M, Shiroishi MS, Nguyen TB, Saake M, Provenzale JM, Enterline D, et al. Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked technical questions. Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 200(1): 24–34. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.9543Essig M, Shiroishi MS, Nguyen TB, Saake M, Provenzale JM, Enterline D, et al. Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked technical questions. Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 200(1): 24–34. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.9543Paldino MJ, Barboriak DP. Fundamentals of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2009; 17(2): 277–89. doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2009.01.007Paldino MJ, Barboriak DP. Fundamentals of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2009; 17(2): 277–89. doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2009.01.007American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Cerebrovascular disease. 2016. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/69478/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Cerebrovascular disease. 2016. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/69478/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Suspected thoracic aortic aneurysm. 2017. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/3099659/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Suspected thoracic aortic aneurysm. 2017. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/3099659/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Abdominal aortic aneurysm: interventional planning and follow-up. 2017. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/70548/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Abdominal aortic aneurysm: interventional planning and follow-up. 2017. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/70548/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).Solar M, Zizka J, Krajina A, Michl A, Raupach J, Klzo L, et al. Comparison of duplex ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of significant renal artery stenosis. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2011; 54(1): 9–12. doi: 10.14712/18059694.2016.10Solar M, Zizka J, Krajina A, Michl A, Raupach J, Klzo L, et al. Comparison of duplex ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of significant renal artery stenosis. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2011; 54(1): 9–12. doi: 10.14712/18059694.2016.10American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Renovascular hypertension. 2017. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/69374/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Renovascular hypertension. 2017. Available at: https: //acsearch.acr.org/docs/69374/Narrative/ (accessed July 17, 2020).Husarik DB, Bashir MR, Weber PW, Nichols EB, Howle LE, Merkle EM, Nelson RC. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography first-pass arterial enhancement as a function of gadolinium-chelate concentration, and the saline chaser volume and injection rate. Invest Radiol. 2012; 47(2): 121–7. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182300603Husarik DB, Bashir MR, Weber PW, Nichols EB, Howle LE, Merkle EM, Nelson RC. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography first-pass arterial enhancement as a function of gadolinium-chelate concentration, and the saline chaser volume and injection rate. Invest Radiol. 2012; 47(2): 121–7. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182300603Tsuboyama T, Jost G, Pietsch H, Tomiyama N. Comparison of power versus manual injection in bolus shape and image quality on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Invest Radiol. 2017; 52(9): 547–53. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000383Tsuboyama T, Jost G, Pietsch H, Tomiyama N. Comparison of power versus manual injection in bolus shape and image quality on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Invest Radiol. 2017; 52(9): 547–53. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000383Jost G, Endrikat J, Pietsch H. The impact of injector- based contrast agent administration on bolus shape and magnetic resonance angiography image quality. Magn Reson Insights. 2017; 10: 1178623x17705894. doi: 10.1177/1178623X17705894Jost G, Endrikat J, Pietsch H. The impact of injector- based contrast agent administration on bolus shape and magnetic resonance angiography image quality. Magn Reson Insights. 2017; 10: 1178623x17705894. doi: 10.1177/1178623X17705894

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.