113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25735448)
1. Prostate magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging at 1.5tesla with endorectal coil versus 3.0tesla without endorectal coil: comparison of spectral quality.
De Visschere P; Nezzo M; Pattyn E; Fonteyne V; Van Praet C; Villeirs G
Clin Imaging; 2015; 39(4):636-41. PubMed ID: 25735448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of an endorectal coil for 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the prostate at 3.0T in comparison to 1.5T: Do we need an endorectal coil?
Hoffner MK; Huebner F; Scholtz JE; Zangos S; Schulz B; Luboldt W; Vogl TJ; Bodelle B
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Aug; 85(8):1432-8. PubMed ID: 27423684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. High-Quality 3-Dimensional 1H Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Imaging of the Prostate Without Endorectal Receive Coil Using A Semi-LASER Sequence.
Tayari N; Steinseifer IK; Selnæs KM; Bathen TF; Maas MC; Heerschap A
Invest Radiol; 2017 Oct; 52(10):640-646. PubMed ID: 28632688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Reproducibility of 3D 1H MR spectroscopic imaging of the prostate at 1.5T.
Lagemaat MW; Zechmann CM; Fütterer JJ; Weiland E; Lu J; Villeirs GM; Holshouser BA; van Hecke P; Lemort M; Schlemmer HP; Barentsz JO; Roell SO; Heerschap A; Scheenen TW
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2012 Jan; 35(1):166-73. PubMed ID: 21960013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. MR imaging of the prostate at 3.0T with external phased array coil - preliminary results.
Morakkabati-Spitz N; Bastian PJ; Gieseke J; Träber F; Kuhl CK; Wattjes MP; Müller SC; Schild HH
Eur J Med Res; 2008 Jun; 13(6):287-91. PubMed ID: 18558555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Use of perfluorocarbon compound in the endorectal coil to improve MR spectroscopy of the prostate.
Choi H; Ma J
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Apr; 190(4):1055-9. PubMed ID: 18356455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Initial experience of 3 tesla endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging and 1H-spectroscopic imaging of the prostate.
Fütterer JJ; Scheenen TW; Huisman HJ; Klomp DW; van Dorsten FA; Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA; Witjes JA; Heerschap A; Barentsz JO
Invest Radiol; 2004 Nov; 39(11):671-80. PubMed ID: 15486528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Narrow band deformable registration of prostate magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, and computed tomography studies.
Schreibmann E; Xing L
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Jun; 62(2):595-605. PubMed ID: 15890605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. (31) P MR spectroscopic imaging combined with (1) H MR spectroscopic imaging in the human prostate using a double tuned endorectal coil at 7T.
Luttje MP; Italiaander MG; Arteaga de Castro CS; van der Kemp WJ; Luijten PR; van Vulpen M; van der Heide UA; Klomp DW
Magn Reson Med; 2014 Dec; 72(6):1516-21. PubMed ID: 24357271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Combined MRI and MRS in prostate cancer: improvement of spectral quality by susceptibility matching.
Scheidler J; Vogel M; Gross P; Heuck A
Rofo; 2009 Jun; 181(6):531-5. PubMed ID: 19353482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A clinical comparison of rigid and inflatable endorectal-coil probes for MRI and 3D MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) of the prostate.
Noworolski SM; Crane JC; Vigneron DB; Kurhanewicz J
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 May; 27(5):1077-82. PubMed ID: 18407539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mapping of the prostate in endorectal coil-based MRI/MRSI and CT: a deformable registration and validation study.
Lian J; Xing L; Hunjan S; Dumoulin C; Levin J; Lo A; Watkins R; Rohling K; Giaquinto R; Kim D; Spielman D; Daniel B
Med Phys; 2004 Nov; 31(11):3087-94. PubMed ID: 15587662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with and without an endorectal coil: a prostate phantom study.
Ma C; Chen L; Scheenen TW; Lu J; Wang J
Acta Radiol; 2015 Nov; 56(11):1342-9. PubMed ID: 25348479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Proton two-dimensional chemical shift imaging for evaluation of prostate cancer: external surface coil vs. endorectal surface coil.
Kaji Y; Wada A; Imaoka I; Matsuo M; Terachi T; Kobashi Y; Sugimura K; Fujii M; Maruyama K; Takizawa O
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2002 Dec; 16(6):697-706. PubMed ID: 12451583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality.
Ullrich T; Quentin M; Oelers C; Dietzel F; Sawicki LM; Arsov C; Rabenalt R; Albers P; Antoch G; Blondin D; Wittsack HJ; Schimmöller L
Eur J Radiol; 2017 May; 90():192-197. PubMed ID: 28583633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. MR imaging of the prostate at 3 Tesla: comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 Tesla.
Sosna J; Pedrosa I; Dewolf WC; Mahallati H; Lenkinski RE; Rofsky NM
Acad Radiol; 2004 Aug; 11(8):857-62. PubMed ID: 15354305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Post-processing correction of the endorectal coil reception effects in MR spectroscopic imaging of the prostate.
Noworolski SM; Reed GD; Kurhanewicz J; Vigneron DB
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2010 Sep; 32(3):654-62. PubMed ID: 20815064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. (1)H MR spectroscopic imaging of the prostate at 7T using spectral-spatial pulses.
Lagemaat MW; Breukels V; Vos EK; Kerr AB; van Uden MJ; Orzada S; Bitz AK; Maas MC; Scheenen TW
Magn Reson Med; 2016 Mar; 75(3):933-45. PubMed ID: 25943445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 2D JPRESS of human prostates using an endorectal receiver coil.
Yue K; Marumoto A; Binesh N; Thomas MA
Magn Reson Med; 2002 Jun; 47(6):1059-64. PubMed ID: 12111951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of image quality and patient discomfort in prostate MRI: pelvic phased array coil vs. endorectal coil.
Barth BK; Cornelius A; Nanz D; Eberli D; Donati OF
Abdom Radiol (NY); 2016 Nov; 41(11):2218-2226. PubMed ID: 27369051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
