AJR F and L Medical Products: Radiation Protection & More
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yousem, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Grossman, R. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yousem, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Grossman, R. I.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 154, 1069-1073, Copyright © 1990 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Pseudoatrophy of the cervical portion of the spinal cord on MR images: a manifestation of the truncation artifact?

DM Yousem, PA Janick, SW Atlas, DB Hackney, SA Glasser, FW Wehrli and RI Grossman
Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 19104.

Routine evaluation of axial MR images of the cervical spine with high- intensity CSF (long TR/TE spin-echo or gradient-echo images) revealed apparent narrowing of the cord's anteroposterior diameter when these images were compared with corresponding postmyelography CT scans. This discrepancy was believed to be due to the truncation artifact at the CSF-cord boundary. To examine the truncation effect, we compared cord diameters in 12 patients on postmyelography CT scans and MR images and then compared these with MR scans of normal volunteers and of an agar- saline spine phantom. There was an artifactual diminution of the cord diameter in the 128-step phase-encoding axis of the 128 x 256-matrix MR scan as compared with the diameter of the cord in the patients' postiohexol CT scans and in the 256 phase-encoded axis MR scan in the volunteer study. A similar discrepancy was noted in the spine phantom study, in which the cord diameter in the 256-step phase-encoded MR scan, the CT scan, and direct measurement exceeded that in the 128-step phase-encoded axis MR scan. The range of differences between the measurements was as large as 2.3 mm (patients), 1.7 mm (volunteers), and 1.8 mm (phantom) for the three studies. In all three studies, varying the photographic window width and level produced variation in the apparent cord diameter of up to 1.5 mm. To eliminate this effect, the cord diameters in the phantom and the normal control subjects were measured at identical window levels. The truncation artifact, coupled with standard window settings used in photography, may lead to inaccurate display of the diameter of the cervical spinal cord.
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?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.