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 Pusey, E
Right arrow Articles by Bradley, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pusey, E
Right arrow Articles by Bradley, W.
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 149, Issue 2, 383-388
Copyright © 1987 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

MR of craniopharyngiomas: tumor delineation and characterization

E Pusey, KE Kortman, BD Flannigan, J Tsuruda, and WG Bradley

MR imaging and CT (with and without contrast enhancement) were performed in 20 patients with an established or clinically suspected diagnosis of craniopharyngioma. Fifteen had biopsy-proven craniopharyngioma and five had presumed craniopharyngioma based on clinical and CT findings. In two cases MR was superior to contrast-enhanced CT in demonstrating the tumor. A variable appearance on T1-weighted MR images reflected the pathologic appearance of craniopharyngiomas. High intensity on T1-weighted images corresponded to high cholesterol content or presence of methemoglobin. MR was the preferred method in the evaluation of tumor extent, especially in the cavernous sinus and posterior clival region. CT was superior to MR in detecting the presence of calcification, which with the clinical history correctly suggested the diagnosis of craniopharyngioma. Both MR and CT studies are desired initially to establish the diagnosis and to evaluate tumor extent. MR was the preferred method in detecting the presence of recurrent tumor.
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
Endocr Relat CancerHome page
G. A Kaltsas, J. Evanson, A. Chrisoulidou, and A. B Grossman
The diagnosis and management of parasellar tumours of the pituitary
Endocr. Relat. Cancer, December 1, 2008; 15(4): 885 - 903.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr. Rev.Home page
N. Karavitaki, S. Cudlip, C. B. T. Adams, and J. A. H. Wass
Craniopharyngiomas
Endocr. Rev., June 1, 2006; 27(4): 371 - 397.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
F. Bonneville, F. Cattin, K. Marsot-Dupuch, D. Dormont, J.-F. Bonneville, and J. Chiras
T1 Signal Hyperintensity in the Sellar Region: Spectrum of Findings
RadioGraphics, January 1, 2006; 26(1): 93 - 113.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ImagingHome page
E J Evanson
Imaging the pituitary gland
Imaging, April 1, 2002; 14(2): 93 - 102.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1987 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.