Literature DB >> 16731363

Comparison of 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MR: imaging of the spine.

Vaishali V Phalke1, Sachin Gujar, Douglas J Quint.   

Abstract

3 T MR imaging brings with it the possibility of a doubled signal-to-noise ratio compared with 1.5 T systems and the possibility of decreased scan times without reduction in quality. Higher cost and other issues however, also need to be examined.

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2006        PMID： 16731363     DOI： 10.1016/j.nic.2006.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimaging Clin N Am        ISSN： 1052-5149            Impact factor:   2.264


  4 in total

1.  Symptomatic nerve root changes on contrast-enhanced MR imaging after surgery for lumbar disk herniation.

Authors:  Y S Lee; E S Choi; C J Song
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2009-02-12       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Comparison of Sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-Weighted Phase-Sensitive Inversion Recovery in the Detection of Spinal Cord Lesions in MS at 3T.

Authors:  P Alcaide-Leon; A Pauranik; L Alshafai; S Rawal; J Oh; W Montanera; G Leung; A Bharatha
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Single-Shot Echo-Planar Diffusion-Weighted MR Imaging at 3T and 1.5T for Differentiation of Benign Vertebral Fracture Edema and Tumor Infiltration.

Authors:  Hee Jin Park; So Yeon Lee; Myung Ho Rho; Eun Chul Chung; Mi Sung Kim; Heon Ju Kwon; In Young Youn
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 3.500

4.  Reference values for the cervical spinal canal and the vertebral bodies by MRI in a general population.

Authors:  Christopher Nell; Robin Bülow; Norbert Hosten; Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Katrin Hegenscheid
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 3.240
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.