Literature DB >> 21765301

T1 pseudohyperintensity on fat-suppressed magnetic resonance imaging: a potential diagnostic pitfall.

Tuan N Huynh1, Thor Johnson, Liina Poder, Bonnie N Joe, Emily M Webb, Fergus V Coakley.   

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging findings in 2 patients with misleading T1 hyperintensity seen only on fat-suppressed images are presented; one with a renal cell carcinoma that was misinterpreted as a hemorrhagic cyst and the other with an ovarian serous cystadenocarcinoma that was misinterpreted as a complicated endometrioma. The apparent T1 hyperintensity on fat-suppressed images in these cases was likely due to varying perception of image signal dependent on local contrast, an optical effect known as the checker-shadow illusion. T1 pseudohyperintensity should be considered when apparently high T1 signal intensity is seen only on fat-suppressed images; review of non-fat-suppressed images may help prevent an erroneous diagnoses of blood-containing lesions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21765301      PMCID: PMC3141817          DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e31822227c3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  8 in total

1.  Optimizing abdominal MR imaging: approaches to common problems.

Authors:  Roberta K Yang; Christopher G Roth; Robert J Ward; Joseph O deJesus; Donald G Mitchell
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 5.333

2.  Paradoxically decreased signal intensity on postcontrast short-TR MR images.

Authors:  D M Yousem; I Ihmeidan; R Quencer; S W Atlas
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  1991 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Unsuppressed fat in the right anterior diaphragmatic region on fat-suppressed T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR images.

Authors:  K Yoshimitsu; D G Varma; E F Jackson
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1995 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Perceptual organization and the judgment of brightness.

Authors:  E H Adelson
Journal:  Science       Date:  1993-12-24       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 5.  Fat suppression in MR imaging: techniques and pitfalls.

Authors:  E M Delfaut; J Beltran; G Johnson; J Rousseau; X Marchandise; A Cotten
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  Magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian cancer arising in endometriomas.

Authors:  Troy T Wu; Fergus V Coakley; Aliya Qayyum; Benjamin M Yeh; Bonnie N Joe; Lee-May Chen
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2004 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.826

7.  MR imaging of hemorrhage and iron deposition in the kidney.

Authors:  M A Roubidoux
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 5.333

8.  MRI of hemorrhagic renal cysts in polycystic kidney disease.

Authors:  P L Hilpert; A C Friedman; P D Radecki; D F Caroline; E K Fishman; M A Meziane; D G Mitchell; H Y Kressel
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 3.959

  8 in total
  3 in total

1.  MR Imaging in Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss. Time to Talk.

Authors:  G Conte; F Di Berardino; C Sina; D Zanetti; E Scola; C Gavagna; L Gaini; G Palumbo; P Capaccio; F Triulzi
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Enhancement patterns of the normal facial nerve on three-dimensional T1W fast spin echo MRI.

Authors:  Richard Warne; Olivia Mary Carney; George Wang; Steve Connor
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Use of Myometrium as an Internal Reference for Endometrial and Cervical Cancer on Multiphase Contrast-Enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Chia-Ni Lin; Yu-San Liao; Wen-Chang Chen; Yue-Sheng Wang; Li-Wen Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.