212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29095415)
21. The clinical correlation of a new practical MRI method for grading cervical neural foraminal stenosis based on oblique sagittal images.
Park HJ; Kim SS; Han CH; Lee SY; Chung EC; Kim MS; Kwon HJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Aug; 203(2):412-7. PubMed ID: 25055278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Clinical utility of new bone imaging using zero-echo-time sequence in neurosurgical procedures: Can zero-echo-time be used in clinical practice in neurosurgery?
Inoue A; Watanabe H; Suehiro S; Nishida N; Shiraishi Y; Furumochi T; Takimoto Y; Ohnishi T; Shigekawa S; Kunieda T
Neuroradiol J; 2023 Jun; 36(3):289-296. PubMed ID: 37259240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Assessment of Solid Pulmonary Nodules or Masses Using Zero Echo Time MR Lung Imaging: A Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison With CT.
Liu Q; Feng Z; Liu WV; Fu W; He L; Cheng X; Mao Z; Zhou W
Front Oncol; 2022; 12():812014. PubMed ID: 35558517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison of noncontrast computed tomography and high-field magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of Great Danes with cervical spondylomyelopathy.
Martin-Vaquero P; da Costa RC; Drost WT
Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2014; 55(5):496-505. PubMed ID: 24547789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Evaluation of Dynamic Foraminal Stenosis with Positional MRI in Patients with C6 Radiculopathy-Mimicking Pain: A Prospective Radiologic Cohort Study.
Kaya O; Sariyilmaz K; Tutpinar Y; Cakmak MF; Cakir MS; Ozkunt O
Biomed Res Int; 2022; 2022():1385387. PubMed ID: 35722464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Interrater Reliability of Cervical Neural Foraminal Stenosis Using Traditional and Splayed Reconstructions: Analysis of One Hundred Scans.
Hersh AM; Zahoor A; Livingston D; Galinato A; Recht H; Hostetter J; Jones CK; Lubelski D; Sair HI
World Neurosurg; 2023 Jul; 175():e314-e319. PubMed ID: 36966908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Utility of Oblique Sagittal Reformatted and Three-dimensional Surface Reconstruction Computed Tomography in Foraminal Stenosis Decompression.
Oshina M; Oshima Y; Tanaka S; Tan LA; Li XJ; Tuchman A; Riew KD
Sci Rep; 2018 Oct; 8(1):16011. PubMed ID: 30375504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of agreement of cervical spine degenerative pathology findings in magnetic resonance imaging studies.
Fu MC; Webb ML; Buerba RA; Neway WE; Brown JE; Trivedi M; Lischuk AW; Haims AH; Grauer JN
Spine J; 2016 Jan; 16(1):42-8. PubMed ID: 26291398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Oblique reformation in cervical spine computed tomography: a new look at an old friend.
Roberts CC; McDaniel NT; Krupinski EA; Erly WK
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2003 Jan; 28(2):167-70. PubMed ID: 12544934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Retrospective analysis of accuracy and positive predictive value of preoperative lumbar MRI grading after successful outcome following outpatient endoscopic decompression for lumbar foraminal and lateral recess stenosis.
Lewandrowski KU
Clin Neurol Neurosurg; 2019 Apr; 179():74-80. PubMed ID: 30870712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. [A New Preoperative Simulation Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Bone-Like Imaging with Zero-Echo-Time Sequence].
Inoue A; Shiraishi Y; Furumochi T; Kunieda T
No Shinkei Geka; 2024 Mar; 52(2):309-318. PubMed ID: 38514120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Diagnostic value of oblique magnetic resonance images for evaluating cervical foraminal stenosis.
Park MS; Moon SH; Lee HM; Kim TH; Oh JK; Lee SY; Oh JB; Riew KD
Spine J; 2015 Apr; 15(4):607-11. PubMed ID: 25452016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Severity of foraminal lumbar stenosis and the relation to clinical symptoms and response to periradicular infiltration-introduction of the "melting sign".
Farshad M; Sutter R; Hoch A
Spine J; 2018 Feb; 18(2):294-299. PubMed ID: 28739476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Is multidetector computed tomography comparable to magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of lumbar foraminal stenosis?
Kang WY; Ahn JM; Lee JW; Lee E; Bae YJ; Seo J; Kim J; Kang HS
Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):197-203. PubMed ID: 27055917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Three-Dimensional Zero Echo Time Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography for Glenoid Bone Assessment.
de Mello RAF; Ma YJ; Ashir A; Jerban S; Hoenecke H; Carl M; Du J; Chang EY
Arthroscopy; 2020 Sep; 36(9):2391-2400. PubMed ID: 32502712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A Technique for Dynamic Cervical Magnetic Resonance Imaging Applied to Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Reliability Study.
Pratali RR; Smith JS; Ancheschi BC; Maranho DA; Savarese A; Nogueira-Barbosa MH; Herrero CFPS
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2019 Jan; 44(1):E26-E32. PubMed ID: 29952883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Assessing Foraminal Stenosis in the Cervical Spine: A Comparison of Three-Dimensional Computed Tomographic Surface Reconstruction to Two-Dimensional Modalities.
Schell A; Rhee JM; Holbrook J; Lenehan E; Park KY
Global Spine J; 2017 May; 7(3):266-271. PubMed ID: 28660110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. A New MRI Grading System for Cervical Foraminal Stenosis Based on Axial T2-Weighted Images.
Kim S; Lee JW; Chai JW; Yoo HJ; Kang Y; Seo J; Ahn JM; Kang HS
Korean J Radiol; 2015; 16(6):1294-302. PubMed ID: 26576119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Uncinate Process Area as a New Sensitive Morphological Parameter to Predict Cervical Neural Foraminal Stenosis.
Mun JU; Cho HR; Kim SH; Yoo JI; Kang KN; Yoon SH; Kim YU
Pain Physician; 2019 Mar; 22(2):E105-E110. PubMed ID: 30921987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Subject-specific bone attenuation correction for brain PET/MR: can ZTE-MRI substitute CT scan accurately?
Khalifé M; Fernandez B; Jaubert O; Soussan M; Brulon V; Buvat I; Comtat C
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Sep; 62(19):7814-7832. PubMed ID: 28837045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
