AJR Not a Member? Click to Join ARRS!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Brant-Zawadzki, M
Right arrow Articles by Kaufman, L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Brant-Zawadzki, M
Right arrow Articles by Kaufman, L
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 140, Issue 5, 847-854
Copyright © 1983 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

NMR demonstration of cerebral abnormalities: comparison with CT

M Brant-Zawadzki, PL Davis, LE Crooks, CM Mills, D Norman, TH Newton, P Sheldon, and L Kaufman

Sixty-eight patients with a wide spectrum of brain pathology were imaged with both computed tomography (CT) using a G.E. 8800 scanner and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) imaging with a 3.5 kG prototype device. NMR was more advantageous in the detection and/or characterization of pathology in 20 of the 68 patients, especially when demyelination was part of the disease process or when the lesion was obscured on CT by beam-hardening artifact. Punctate foci of calcification identified on CT were not detected on NMR, but larger calcifications were seen. NMR was sensitive to detection of both normal and abnormal vascular structures. The ability of NMR to differentiate among different pathologic entities remains to be fully evaluated. NMR currently complements CT in the evaluation of many disease entities and may actually supplant CT in some. The full future potential of NMR and its role with respect to CT has only begun to be elucidated.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
StrokeHome page
L. Pantoni and J. H. Garcia
The Significance of Cerebral White Matter Abnormalities 100 Years After Binswanger's Report : A Review
Stroke, July 1, 1995; 26(7): 1293 - 1301.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
CLIN PEDIATRHome page
D. A. Gusnard and R. A. Zimmerman
Computed Tomography Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging -: Of the Pediatric Central Nervous System Techniques, Indications, and Examples
Clinical Pediatrics, March 1, 1990; 29(3): 136 - 157.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Arch NeurolHome page
G. Sarpel, F. Chaudry, and W. Hindo
Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Periventricular Hyperintensity in a Veterans Administration Hospital Population
Arch Neurol, July 1, 1987; 44(7): 725 - 728.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1983 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.