Literature DB >> 7866844

Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging of the spine after surgery with or without implant.

H Leclet1.   

Abstract

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is often disturbed after spine surgical procedures with or without an implant. Artifacts are induced by ferromagnetic or nonferromagnetic implants and devices and by small metallic particles left by surgical instruments. All metallic artifacts can affect the quality and usefulness of postoperative spine MR examinations. The physical effects caused by the introduction of metal or other conductive materials into a magnetic field and their consequences are presented. The application to postoperative spine MR examinations and solutions to reduce artifacts are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  1994        PMID： 7866844     DOI： 10.1007/bf02226572

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN： 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  28 in total

Review 1.  Safety considerations in MR imaging.

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

Review 2.  Magnetic resonance imaging in orthopaedics.

Authors:  I Watt
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1991-07

3.  Important considerations in measurement of attractive force on metallic implants in MR imagers.

Authors:  N J Kagetsu; A W Litt
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging after pedicular screw fixation of the spine.

Authors:  N A Ebraheim; E R Savolaine; S H Stitgen; W T Jackson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the postoperative lumbar spine.

Authors:  S Djukic; H K Genant; C A Helms; R G Holt
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 2.303

6.  The quality of magnetic resonance imaging, as affected by the composition of the halo orthosis. A brief note.

Authors:  R T Ballock; P C Hajek; T P Byrne; S R Garfin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Artifacts in MR imaging after surgical intervention.

Authors:  W Heindel; G Friedmann; J Bunke; B Thomas; R Firsching; R I Ernestus
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1986 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

8.  Magnetic resonance imaging of postoperative patients with metallic implants.

Authors:  M Mechlin; D Thickman; H Y Kressel; W Gefter; P Joseph
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Potential hazards and artifacts of ferromagnetic and nonferromagnetic surgical and dental materials and devices in nuclear magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  P F New; B R Rosen; T J Brady; F S Buonanno; J P Kistler; C T Burt; W S Hinshaw; J H Newhouse; G M Pohost; J M Taveras
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Titanium hip implants for improved magnetic resonance and computed tomography examinations.

Authors:  N A Ebraheim; E R Savolaine; J Zeiss; W T Jackson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 4.176
View more
  2 in total

1.  [Imaging of sacral chordoma: comparison between MRI and CT].

Authors:  C Plathow; M-A Weber; J Debus; H-U Kauczor
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 0.635

2.  Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation after implantation of a titanium cervical disc prosthesis: a comparison of 1.5 and 3 Tesla magnet strength.

Authors:  Jarle Sundseth; Eva A Jacobsen; Frode Kolstad; Oystein P Nygaard; John A Zwart; Per K Hol
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 3.134
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.