Gadolinium Retention Can Cause Various Medical Problems With General Diagnosis Label Of Gadolinium Deposition Disease
(Posted by Tom Lamb at DrugInjuryWatch.com)
There are two types of gadolinium based contrast agents (GBCAs): linear and macrocyclic. Generally, the macrocyclic GBCAs are regarded as “safer” than the linear GBCAs, as the structure of the macrocyclic gadolinium agents makes it more difficult for the gadolinium to break away from its bonding agent. When this happens, there can be gadolinium retention and related harmful medical conditions -- or gadolinium contrast agent "side effects", one might say.
In more detail, this gadolinium retention situation can lead to various serious medical problems which have been given the general diagnosis label of Gadolinium Deposition Disease (GDD). Essentially, this GDD diagnosis indicates there is some medical condition associated with gadolinium toxicity which is present in the patient. Alternatively, this gadolinium retention situation is sometimes called Gadolinium Storage Condition.
In May 2018 the Radiology medical journal published an experimental study article which examined the difference between linear gadolinium contrast agents and macrocyclic agents with respect to gadolinium retention. The study findings support the contention that following the injection of linear gadolinium based contrast agents there is more gadolinium retention.
Gadolinium-Containing Contrast Agents
Free Case Evaluation
Strictly Confidential, No Obligation.
From the Abstract from this 2018 medical journal article, "One-year Retention of Gadolinium in the Brain: Comparison of Gadodiamide and Gadoterate Meglumine in a Rodent Model", we get an overview of the study and its findings:
Purpose: To compare the long-term brain elimination kinetics and gadolinium species in healthy rats after repeated injections of the contrast agents [Omniscan (gadodiamide), which is a linear contrast agent,] or [Dotarem (gadoterate), which is a macrocyclic contrast agent].
Materials and Methods: Nine-week-old rats received five doses of 2.4 mmol gadolinium per kilogram of body weight over 5 weeks and were followed for 12 months with T1-weighted MRI....
Results: T1 hyperintensity of the deep cerebellar nuclei was observed only in [Omniscan (gadodiamide)]-treated rats and remained stable from the 1st month after the last injection.... Seventy-five percent of the total gadolinium detected after the last injection of [Omniscan (gadodiamide)]... was retained in the cerebellum at 1 year..., with binding of soluble gadolinium to macromolecules. No T1 hyperintensity was observed with [Dotarem (gadoterate)], consistent with a rapid, time-dependent washout of the intact gadolinium chelate down to background levels....
Conclusion: After repeated administration of [Omniscan (gadodiamide)], a large portion of gadolinium was retained in the brain, with binding of soluble gadolinium to macromolecules. After repeated injection of [Dotarem (gadoterate)], only traces of the intact chelated gadolinium were observed with time-dependent clearance.
For some additional information about gadolinium based contrast agents (GBCAs) causing Gadolinium Deposition Disease (GDD) as a result of gadolinium retention, here is list of our articles written during the past ten months:
- MRI Contrast Agents: Gadolinium Retention Warnings Added To Drug Label
- Gadolinium Deposition Disease Explained: How It Is Diagnosed, And More
- Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents: Timeline of FDA Regulatory Actions
- Gadolinium Deposition Disease can Result from use of Contrast Agents During MRI & MRA Procedures
- FDA And MHRA Actions For Gadolinium-Containing Contrast Agents Differ
- MRI Drugs Magnevist, Omniscan, And OptiMARK Off The Market In Europe
If we can be of assistance to you or a loved one as regards a possible gadolinium contrast agents case, please do not hesitate to contact us.
DrugInjuryLaw.com: Medical & Legal Information About Drug Side Effects (All website content by attorney Tom Lamb)
Drug Injury Case Evaluation - Free. Confidential. No Obligation. (Case review done by attorney Tom Lamb)