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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: MR portography: preliminary comparison with CT portography and conventional MR imaging.
    Author: Dravid VS, Shapiro MJ, Mitchell DG, Outwater EK, Piccoli CW, Feld RI, Wechsler RJ, Rosato FE.
    Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging; 1994; 4(6):767-71. PubMed ID: 7865935.
    Abstract:
    Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with arterial portography (MRAP) was compared with computed tomography with arterial portography (CTAP) and conventional MR imaging for preoperative evaluation of hepatic masses in eight patients (nine studies). Twenty contiguous, 10-mm-thick-section CTAP images were obtained. MR imaging included T1- and T2-weighted spin-echo and fast multiplanar SPGR (spoiled gradient-recalled acquisition in the steady state) techniques. For MRAP, 0.1 mmol/kg gadopentetate dimeglumine was injected into the superior mesenteric artery. Portographic-phase, 8-mm-thick-section, axial SPGR images were first obtained, followed by "systemic phase" SPGR images. Lesions were seen best on the portographic-phase MRAP images and were less conspicuous on the systemic-phase MRAP, CTAP and conventional MR images. Of 19 visualized lesions, 18 were seen with MRAP; however; five subcentimeter lesions seen with MRAP were not seen with conventional MR imaging or CTAP. Systemic recirculation of iodinated contrast material from the bolus and from previous angiography is a potential limitation of CTAP. For both CTAP and MRAP, optimal results are expected if all images are obtained during a single breath hold, within seconds of the onset of contrast agent administration.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]