Comparison of the quality of lower limb magnetic resonance angiographies performed with different paramagnetic contrast agents in relation to body mass index and ejection fraction.

AIM: To compare the quality of magnetic resonance angiographies (MRAs) performed with different contrast agents and to evaluate the effect of body mass index (BMI) and ejection fraction (EF) on the quality of these MRAs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 120 patients between the age of 43 and 86 years were subjected to MRAs with different contrast agents (Gadobutrolum, Dimeglumini gadobenas, Gadofosveset trisodium). Each patient's BMI was calculated, and EF was established using MR examination of the heart. Objective evaluations of the quality of the MRAs were done using abdominal fat-to-aorta enhancement ratio (FAR) comparisons. This ratio was then correlated with the patient's BMI and EF. Subjective evaluations of the quality of the MRAs were done by 5 blinded evaluators. Correlation analysis and analysis of variance were used for statistical assessement. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in FAR for any of the contrast agent groups. There was a mesoscale correlation between a patient's BMI and FAR. However, no correlation was found between the EF and FAR for any of the contrast agent groups. The results of the subjective evaluation showed that there was no statistical difference in the quality of MRAs regardless of the contrast agent used. CONCLUSION: Subjectively there was no statistically significant difference in the quality of the MRAs. Irrespective of the type of contrast used or the patient's EF, the lower the BMI of a patient the higher the signal enhancement and hence the better the quality of the MRA produced in that patient.

Covered biodegradable stent: new therapeutic option for the management of esophageal perforation or anastomotic leak.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate our experience with the treatment of postoperative anastomotic leaks and benign esophageal perforations with covered biodegradable stents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2008 to 2010, we treated five men with either an anastomotic leak or benign esophageal perforation by implanting of covered biodegradable Ella-BD stents. The average age of the patients was 60 (range, 38-74) years. Postoperative anastomotic leaks were treated in four patients (1 after esophagectomy, 1 after resection of diverticulum, 2 after gastrectomy). In one patient, perforation occurred as a complication of the treatment of an esophageal rupture (which occurred during a balloon dilatation of benign stenosis) with a metallic stent. RESULTS: Seven covered biodegradable stents were implanted in five patients. Primary technical success was 100%. Clinical success (leak sealing) was achieved in four of the five patients (80%). Stent migration occurred in three patients. In two of these patients, the leak had been sealed by the time of stent migration, therefore no reintervention was necessary. In one patient an additional stent had to be implanted. CONCLUSION: The use of biodegradable covered stents for the treatment of anastomotic leaks or esophageal perforations is technically feasible and safe. The initial results are promising; however, larger number of patients will be required to evaluate the capability of these biodegradable stents in the future. The use of biodegradable material for coverage of the stent is essential.