Literature DB >> 10509224

Magnetic resonance imaging. Application to family practice.

R H Goh1, S Somers, E Jurriaans, J Yu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review indications, contraindications, and risks of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in order to help primary care physicians refer patients appropriately for MRI, screen for contraindications to using MRI, and educate patients about MRI. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: Recommendations are based on classic textbooks, the policies of our MRI group, and a literature search using MEDLINE with the MeSH headings magnetic resonance imaging, brain, musculoskeletal, and spine. The search was limited to human, English-language, and review articles. Evidence in favour of using MRI for imaging the head, spine, and joints is well established. For cardiac, abdominal, and pelvic conditions, MRI has been shown useful for certain indications, usually to complement other modalities. MAIN MESSAGE: For demonstrating soft tissue conditions, MRI is better than computed tomography (CT), but CT shows bone and acute bleeding better. Therefore, patients with trauma or suspected intracranial bleeding should have CT. Tumours, congenital abnormalities, vascular structures, and the cervical or thoracic spine show better on MRI. Either modality can be used for lower back pain. Cardiac, abdominal, and pelvic abnormalities should be imaged with ultrasound or CT before MRI. Contraindications for MRI are mainly metallic implants or shrapnel, severe claustrophobia, or obesity.
CONCLUSIONS: With the increasing availability of MRI scanners in Canada, better understanding of the indications, contraindications, and risks will be helpful for family physicians and their patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10509224      PMCID: PMC2328549     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  31 in total

1.  Imaging of acute stroke.

Authors:  R N Bryan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 2.  Safety considerations in MR imaging.

Authors:  E Kanal; F G Shellock; L Talagala
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Policies, guidelines, and recommendations for MR imaging safety and patient management. SMRI Safety Committee.

Authors:  F G Shellock; E Kanal
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1991 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Femoral head avascular necrosis: MR imaging with clinical-pathologic and radionuclide correlation.

Authors:  J Beltran; L J Herman; J M Burk; W A Zuelzer; R N Clark; J G Lucas; L D Weiss; A Yang
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Anxiety in patients undergoing MR imaging.

Authors:  M E Quirk; A J Letendre; R A Ciottone; J F Lingley
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Midgestational exposure of pregnant BALB/c mice to magnetic resonance imaging conditions.

Authors:  W L Heinrichs; P Fong; M Flannery; S C Heinrichs; L E Crooks; A Spindle; R A Pedersen
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1988 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.546

7.  Emotional distress during magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  J A Flaherty; K Hoskinson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-02-16       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Metallic ballistic fragments: MR imaging safety and artifacts.

Authors:  G P Teitelbaum; C A Yee; D D Van Horn; H S Kim; P M Colletti
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  MR imaging of brain contusions: a comparative study with CT.

Authors:  J R Hesselink; C F Dowd; M E Healy; P Hajek; L L Baker; T G Luerssen
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Evaluation of three psychologic interventions to reduce anxiety during MR imaging.

Authors:  M E Quirk; A J Letendre; R A Ciottone; J F Lingley
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.