138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35482042)
1. [Modern mid-field magnetic resonance imaging in private practice : Field report].
Wujciak D
Radiologe; 2022 May; 62(5):405-409. PubMed ID: 35482042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. More Space, Less Noise-New-generation Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging Systems Can Improve Patient Comfort: A Prospective 0.55T-1.5T-Scanner Comparison.
Rusche T; Vosshenrich J; Winkel DJ; Donners R; Segeroth M; Bach M; Merkle EM; Breit HC
J Clin Med; 2022 Nov; 11(22):. PubMed ID: 36431182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [New clinical applications for low-field magnetic resonance imaging : Technical and physical aspects].
Breit HC; Vosshenrich J; Bach M; Merkle EM
Radiologe; 2022 May; 62(5):394-399. PubMed ID: 35191997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Image Quality of Lumbar Spine Imaging at 0.55T Low-Field MRI is Comparable to Conventional 1.5T MRI - Initial Observations in Healthy Volunteers.
Breit HC; Vosshenrich J; Hofmann V; Rusche T; Kovacs BK; Bach M; Manneck S; Harder D
Acad Radiol; 2023 Nov; 30(11):2440-2446. PubMed ID: 36841743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Abdominal MRI on a Commercial 0.55T System: Initial Evaluation and Comparison to Higher Field Strengths.
Ramachandran A; Hussain HK; Gulani V; Kelsey L; Mendiratta-Lala M; Richardson J; Masotti M; Dudek N; Morehouse J; Panagis KR; Wright K; Seiberlich N
Acad Radiol; 2024 Feb; ():. PubMed ID: 38320946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Economic aspects of low-field magnetic resonance imaging : Acquisition, installation, and maintenance costs of 0.55 T systems].
Vosshenrich J; Breit HC; Bach M; Merkle EM
Radiologe; 2022 May; 62(5):400-404. PubMed ID: 35348808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparing Metal Artifact Severity and Ability to Assess Near-Metal Anatomy Between 0.55 T and 1.5 T MRI in Patients with Metallic Spinal Implants-A Scanner Comparison Study.
Seifert AC; Breit HC; Schlicht F; Donners R; Harder D; Jan V
Acad Radiol; 2024 Jan; ():. PubMed ID: 38242732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Initial experience with a next-generation low-field MRI scanner: Potential for breast imaging?
Dietzel M; Laun FB; Heiß R; Wenkel E; Bickelhaupt S; Hack C; Uder M; Ohlmeyer S
Eur J Radiol; 2024 Apr; 173():111352. PubMed ID: 38330534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of 12-lead electrocardiogram at 0.55T for improved cardiac monitoring in magnetic resonance imaging.
Kolandaivelu A; Bruce CG; Seemann F; Yildirim DK; Campbell-Washburn AE; Lederman RJ; Herzka DA
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson; 2024 Summer; 26(1):101009. PubMed ID: 38342406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of echo spacing and readout bandwidth on basic performances of EPI-fMRI acquisition sequences implemented on two 1.5 T MR scanner systems.
Giannelli M; Diciotti S; Tessa C; Mascalchi M
Med Phys; 2010 Jan; 37(1):303-10. PubMed ID: 20175493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Imaging of the musculoskeletal system using low-field magnetic resonance imaging].
Pogarell T; May MS; Nagel AM; Uder M; Heiss R
Radiologe; 2022 May; 62(5):410-417. PubMed ID: 35416477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Unexpectedly Smaller Artifacts of 3.0-T Magnetic Resonance Imaging than 1.5 T: Recommendation of 3.0-T Scanners for Patients with Magnet-Resistant Adjustable Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt Devices.
Amano Y; Kuroda N; Uchida D; Sakakura Y; Nakatogawa H; Ando N; Nakayama T; Sato H; Masui T; Sameshima T; Tanaka T
World Neurosurg; 2019 Oct; 130():e393-e399. PubMed ID: 31260847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Dynamic Liver Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Free-Breathing: Feasibility of a Cartesian T1-Weighted Acquisition Technique With Compressed Sensing and Additional Self-Navigation Signal for Hard-Gated and Motion-Resolved Reconstruction.
Kaltenbach B; Bucher AM; Wichmann JL; Nickel D; Polkowski C; Hammerstingl R; Vogl TJ; Bodelle B
Invest Radiol; 2017 Nov; 52(11):708-714. PubMed ID: 28622249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Minimizing ferromagnetic artefact with metallic lumbar total disc arthroplasty devices at adjacent segments: technical note.
Marshman LA; Strong G; Trewhella M; Kasis A; Friesem T
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2010 Jan; 35(2):252-6. PubMed ID: 20081522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Imaging of the lung using low-field magnetic resonance imaging].
Hinsen M; Heiss R; Nagel AM; Lévy S; Uder M; Bickelhaupt S; May MS
Radiologe; 2022 May; 62(5):418-428. PubMed ID: 35416476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Quantifying the Financial Savings of Motion Correction in Brain MRI: A Model-Based Estimate of the Costs Arising From Patient Head Motion and Potential Savings From Implementation of Motion Correction.
Slipsager JM; Glimberg SL; Søgaard J; Paulsen RR; Johannesen HH; Martens PC; Seth A; Marner L; Henriksen OM; Olesen OV; Højgaard L
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 Sep; 52(3):731-738. PubMed ID: 32144848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Does bore size matter?-A comparison of the subjective perception of patient comfort during low field (0.55 Tesla) and standard (1.5 Tesla) MRI imaging.
Michael AE; Heuser A; Moenninghoff C; Surov A; Borggrefe J; Kroeger JR; Niehoff JH
Medicine (Baltimore); 2023 Nov; 102(47):e36069. PubMed ID: 38013308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Open magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners.
Hailey D
Issues Emerg Health Technol; 2006 Nov; (92):1-4. PubMed ID: 17086657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Initial assessment of 3D magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) towards quantitative brain imaging for radiation therapy.
Lu L; Chen Y; Shen C; Lian J; Das S; Marks L; Lin W; Zhu T
Med Phys; 2020 Mar; 47(3):1199-1214. PubMed ID: 31834641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using an Open 1.0T MR Platform: A Comparative Study with a 1.5T Tunnel System.
Fischbach K; Kosiek O; Friebe B; Wybranski C; Schnackenburg B; Schmeisser A; Smid J; Ricke J; Pech M
Pol J Radiol; 2017; 82():498-505. PubMed ID: 29662579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
