Linked Life Data

2400896

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/2400896

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
753
pubmed:dateCreated
1990-10-26
pubmed:abstractText
A direct comparison of post-gadolinium FLASH 90 degrees magnetic resonance (MR) images against conventional post-gadolinium T1-weighted spin echo MR images obtained in patients with suspected cerebral metastatic disease shows the FLASH sequence to be inferior. False negative FLASH 90 degrees gadolinium-enhanced MR scans are thought to be a result of either magnetic susceptibility artefact or inferior contrast resolution. False positive FLASH 90 degrees gadolinium-enhanced MR images are a result of either difficulty in interpreting the high signal seen in small vessels or, again, magnetic susceptibility effects. In addition, our study shows small abnormalities suggestive of cerebral metastases on the FLASH 90 degrees gadolinium-enhanced sequences which were not seen on the spin echo T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced sequences. We believe that spin echo T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced MR sequences demonstrated 131 out of 139 (94.2%) and FLASH 90 degrees gadolinium-enhanced MR sequences detected 122 out of 139 (87.8%) possible metastases. From this, we conclude that spin echo T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced MR sequences is a better test than FLASH 90 degrees gadolinium-enhanced MR in the diagnosis of brain metastases and that either sequence alone is limited as a screening test.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
AIM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Sep
pubmed:issn
0007-1285
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
63
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
712-5
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1990
pubmed:articleTitle
Comparison of spin echo T1-weighted and FLASH 90 degrees gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of cerebral metastases.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study