| Literature DB >> 3031755 |
T Krahe, J Gieseke, M Herter, H G Trier, H H Wolf, K Lackner.
Abstract
By using high field strengths and surface coils, MRT achieves a resolution comparable with CT in the orbita. The advantages of MRT are good contrast resolution and imaging in several planes. Twenty-six patients have been examined by MRT, which has shown high sensitivity and good detail for the demonstration of pathological changes. In spite of this, MRT at present is not a realistic alternative to ultrasound and CT, because it is unable to demonstrate bone and calcification; its specificity is low, but the time and cost of the examination is high. It is indicated only for problems involving the optic nerve and chiasma.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 1987 PMID: 3031755 DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1048481
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rofo ISSN: 1438-9010