Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Orrison, W. W.
Right arrow Articles by Mettler, F. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Orrison, W. W., Jr
Right arrow Articles by Mettler, F. A., Jr

Radiology, Vol 181, 121-127, Copyright © 1991 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Comparison of CT, low-field-strength MR imaging, and high-field- strength MR imaging. Work in progress

WW Orrison Jr, GK Stimac, EA Stevens, DL LaMasters, MC Espinosa, L Cobb and FA Mettler Jr
Department of Radiology, University of New Mexico Hospital, Albuquerque 87131.

To assess objectively the sensitivity and specificity of low-field- strength (0.064 T) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, a prospective blind study of 280 examinations was performed to compare low-field-strength MR imaging with computed tomography (CT) and with high-field-strength (1.5-T) MR imaging of the cranium. The sensitivity (defined as the true- positive rate) with high-field MR imaging was superior to that with low- field MR imaging and CT in helping detect overall abnormalities. Sensitivities were generally similar over a broad range of specific cranial central nervous system diseases. Low-field and high-field MR imaging were equivalent in the blind diagnoses of neoplasms and white matter disease, whereas low-field MR and CT were equivalent in the blind diagnoses of contusion, subdural and epidural hematoma, sinus disease, normality, and abnormality. The specificities with low-field MR imaging and CT were substantially better than those with high-field MR imaging.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. N. Al-Okaili, J. Krejza, J. H. Woo, R. L. Wolf, D. M. O'Rourke, K. D. Judy, H. Poptani, and E. R. Melhem
Intraaxial Brain Masses: MR Imaging-based Diagnostic Strategy--Initial Experience
Radiology, May 1, 2007; 243(2): 539 - 550.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PediatricsHome page
L. S. Medina, K. M. Kuntz, and S. Pomeroy
Children With Headache Suspected of Having a Brain Tumor: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Diagnostic Strategies
Pediatrics, August 1, 2001; 108(2): 255 - 263.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. W. Katzberg, P. F. Benedetti, C. M. Drake, M. Ivanovic, R. A. Levine, C. S. Beatty, W. R. Nemzek, R. A. McFall, F. K. Ontell, D. M. Bishop, et al.
Acute Cervical Spine Injuries: Prospective MR Imaging Assessment at a Level 1 Trauma Center
Radiology, October 1, 1999; 213(1): 203 - 212.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
A. J. Maubon, J.-M. Ferru, V. Berger, M. C. Soulage, M. DeGraef, P. Aubas, P. Coupeau, E. Dumont, and J.-P. Rouanet
Effect of Field Strength on MR Images: Comparison of the Same Subject at 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 T
RadioGraphics, July 1, 1999; 19(4): 1057 - 1067.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
D. L. Kent, D. R. Haynor, W. T. Longstreth, and E. B. Larson
The Clinical Efficacy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Neuroimaging
Ann Intern Med, May 15, 1994; 120(10): 856 - 871.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1991 by the Radiological Society of North America.