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: [Fat-suppressing STIR sequences with and without contrast media in the MRT of ENT tumors].
    Author: Brüning R, Heuck A, Naegele M, Seelos K, Vahlensieck M, Reiser M.
    Journal: Rofo; 1994 May; 160(5):412-6. PubMed ID: 8173051.
    Abstract:
    Fat-suppressed STIR (short TI inversion recovery) sequences were compared to plain and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted SE sequences of head and neck tumors. 19 patients underwent MR imaging on a 0.5 Telsa system (T5-II, Philips). STIR imaging parameters: TR/TE = 1000/20 ms, inversion pulse 100 ms. All films were read by four radiologists. The image quality was graded: score from 0 to 5, by means that grade 5 = optimal quality. Sensitivity was 89% in STIR, 96% in SE sequences. Tumor delineation was graded good in the enhanced T1-weighted and enhanced fat suppression images. The unenhanced imaging was superior in STIR (STIR/T1 = 2.8/2.43). The tumor contrast was best in contrast enhanced and plain STIR sequences (STIR contrast = 3.41), and in the contrast enhanced T1-weighted SE (3.33). STIR almost equaled T1 post-contrast in respect of tumour conspicuity, but the sensitivity was lower. STIR can be a supplement to SE, but cannot substitute T1 postcontrast. The combined use is expected to have the highest assessment value.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]