Literature DB >> 8798043

MRI of peripheral joints with a low-field dedicated system: a reliable and cost-effective alternative to high-field units?

B Kersting-Sommerhoff1, N Hof, M Lenz, P Gerhardt.   

Abstract

In the age of health care cost containment new imaging technology has to meet diagnostic requirements as well as economic limitations. In the MR sector new dedicated systems promise reliable diagnostic information at considerably lower costs than whole-body imagers. Within the past 18 months we have examined 2200 patients with acute and chronic lesions of peripheral joints (knee, ankle, foot, elbow, wrist, hand) in a 0.2T dedicated MR system (ARTOSCAN, Esaote Biomedica, Genoa, Italy). We report our experience with this system focusing on its special features, cost-effectiveness and on diagnostic accuracy of low-field MR studies of the knee in correlation with arthroscopy and in comparison with high-field whole-body imagers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8798043     DOI: 10.1007/bf00182495

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  13 in total

1.  Can MR imaging effectively replace diagnostic arthroscopy?

Authors:  P A Ruwe; J Wright; R L Randall; J K Lynch; P Jokl; S McCarthy
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Magnetic resonance imaging of meniscal and cruciate injuries of the knee.

Authors:  N R Boeree; A F Watkinson; C E Ackroyd; C Johnson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1991-05

3.  The clinical value of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of meniscal disorders.

Authors:  J Raunest; K Oberle; J Loehnert; H Hoetzinger
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  M.R. imaging of the knee: a prospective trial using a low field strength magnet.

Authors:  P James; G Buirski
Journal:  Australas Radiol       Date:  1990-02

5.  MR imaging of the knee with a 0.064-T permanent magnet.

Authors:  P A Rothschild; J M Domesek; L Kaufman; D M Kramer; S F Dye; L J Anderson; J L Lewis; M K Gon
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Physics of thin-section MR imaging at low field strength.

Authors:  D M Kramer; R J Guzman; J W Carlson; L E Crooks; L Kaufman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 7.  Economic and cost-effectiveness investigations of radiologic practices.

Authors:  N R Powe
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  MR diagnosis of internal derangements of the knee: effect of field strength on efficacy.

Authors:  M J Barnett
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  New imaging technology and cost containment.

Authors:  B J Hillman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  [MR tomography of the extremities using the hemibody system ARTOSCAN. Initial experiences and expectations].

Authors:  P Gerhardt; W Golder; B Kersting-Sommerhoff; N Hof
Journal:  Rontgenpraxis       Date:  1994-01
View more
  4 in total

1.  MR arthrography of the shoulder: comparison of low-field (0.2 T) vs high-field (1.5 T) imaging.

Authors:  R Loew; K F Kreitner; M Runkel; J Zoellner; M Thelen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Diagnosis of acute fractures of the extremities: comparison of low-field MRI and conventional radiography.

Authors:  Philipp Remplik; Axel Stäbler; Thomas Merl; Frank Roemer; Klaus Bohndorf
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-11-05       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Kinematic magnetic resonance imaging of the effect of bracing on patellar position: qualitative assessment using an extremity magnetic resonance system.

Authors:  F G Shellock; M Mullin; K R Stone; M Coleman; J V Crues
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Minimum Field Strength Simulator for Proton Density Weighted MRI.

Authors:  Ziyue Wu; Weiyi Chen; Krishna S Nayak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.