These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26481696)

  • 1. Evaluation of 39 medical implants at 7.0 T.
    Feng DX; McCauley JP; Morgan-Curtis FK; Salam RA; Pennell DR; Loveless ME; Dula AN
    Br J Radiol; 2015; 88(1056):20150633. PubMed ID: 26481696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessment of MRI issues at 7 T for 28 implants and other objects.
    Dula AN; Virostko J; Shellock FG
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Feb; 202(2):401-5. PubMed ID: 24450683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Metallic neurosurgical implants for cranial reconstruction and fixation: assessment of magnetic field interactions, heating and artefacts at 3.0 Tesla.
    Cunningham AS; Harding S; Chatfield DA; Hutchinson P; Carpenter TA; Pickard JD; Menon DK
    Br J Neurosurg; 2005 Apr; 19(2):167-72. PubMed ID: 16120521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Metallic neurosurgical implants: evaluation of magnetic field interactions, heating, and artifacts at 1.5-Tesla.
    Shellock FG
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2001 Sep; 14(3):295-9. PubMed ID: 11536406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessment of MRI issues at 3-Tesla for metallic surgical implants: findings applied to 61 additional skin closure staples and vessel ligation clips.
    Gill A; Shellock FG
    J Cardiovasc Magn Reson; 2012 Jan; 14(1):3. PubMed ID: 22230200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In vitro magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of ossicular implants at 3 T.
    Shellock FG; Meepos LN; Stapleton MR; Valencerina S
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jul; 33(5):871-7. PubMed ID: 22643444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Managing Patients With Unlabeled Passive Implants on MR Systems Operating Below 1.5 T.
    Shellock FG; Rosen MS; Webb A; Kimberly WT; Rajan S; Nacev AN; Crues JV
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2024 May; 59(5):1514-1522. PubMed ID: 37767980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of MR issues for the latest standard brands of orthopedic metal implants: plates and screws.
    Zou YF; Chu B; Wang CB; Hu ZY
    Eur J Radiol; 2015 Mar; 84(3):450-457. PubMed ID: 25544555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. In vitro assessment of 3-T MRI issues for a bioabsorbable, coronary artery scaffold with metallic markers.
    Shellock FG; Giangarra CJ
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2014 Feb; 32(2):163-7. PubMed ID: 24315524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 7-Tesla MRI of the brain in a research subject with bilateral, total knee replacement implants: Case report and proposed safety guidelines.
    Barisano G; Culo B; Shellock FG; Sepehrband F; Martin K; Stevens M; Wang DJ; Toga AW; Law M
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Apr; 57():313-316. PubMed ID: 30496792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of magnetic resonance safety of veterinary radiofrequency identification devices at 1 T.
    Baker MA; MacDonald I
    Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2011; 52(2):161-7. PubMed ID: 21388467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Septal repair implants: evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging safety at 3 T.
    Shellock FG; Valencerina S
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2005 Dec; 23(10):1021-5. PubMed ID: 16376188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Convex optimization of MRI exposure for mitigation of RF-heating from active medical implants.
    Córcoles J; Zastrow E; Kuster N
    Phys Med Biol; 2015 Sep; 60(18):7293-308. PubMed ID: 26350025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Integral method for numerical simulation of MRI artifacts induced by metallic implants.
    Balac S; Caloz G; Cathelineau G; Chauvel B; de Certaines JD
    Magn Reson Med; 2001 Apr; 45(4):724-7. PubMed ID: 11284004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Metallic artefacts in MR imaging: effects of main field orientation and strength.
    Guermazi A; Miaux Y; Zaim S; Peterfy CG; White D; Genant HK
    Clin Radiol; 2003 Apr; 58(4):322-8. PubMed ID: 12662956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessment of MRI issues for a new cerebral spinal fluid shunt, gravitational valve (GV).
    Moghtader D; Crawack HJ; Miethke C; Dörlemann Z; Shellock FG
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2017 Dec; 44():8-14. PubMed ID: 28735732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Experience with magnetic resonance imaging of human subjects with passive implants and tattoos at 7 T: a retrospective study.
    Noureddine Y; Bitz AK; Ladd ME; Thürling M; Ladd SC; Schaefers G; Kraff O
    MAGMA; 2015 Dec; 28(6):577-90. PubMed ID: 26410044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. MRI compatibility and visibility assessment of implantable medical devices.
    Schueler BA; Parrish TB; Lin JC; Hammer BE; Pangrle BJ; Ritenour ER; Kucharczyk J; Truwit CL
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 1999 Apr; 9(4):596-603. PubMed ID: 10232520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cancellation of metal-induced MRI artifacts with dual-component paramagnetic and diamagnetic material: mathematical modelization and experimental verification.
    Chauvel B; Cathelineau G; Balac S; Lecerf J; de Certaines JD
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 1996; 6(6):936-8. PubMed ID: 8956140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Magnetic resonance imaging of artificial lumbar disks: safety and metal artifacts.
    Yang CW; Liu L; Wang J; Dong AS; Lu JP; He SS; Li M
    Chin Med J (Engl); 2009 Apr; 122(8):911-6. PubMed ID: 19493413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.