Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • Low-Field MRI
    • Alzheimer Disease
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • View All
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR Awards, New Junior Editors, and more. Read the latest AJNR updates

Research ArticlePediatrics

Improved Delineation of Ventricular Shunt Catheters Using Fast Steady-State Gradient Recalled-Echo Sequences in a Rapid Brain MR Imaging Protocol in Nonsedated Pediatric Patients

J.H. Miller, T. Walkiewicz, R.B. Towbin and J.G. Curran
American Journal of Neuroradiology March 2010, 31 (3) 430-435; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1866
J.H. Miller
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T. Walkiewicz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R.B. Towbin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.G. Curran
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Rapid brain MR imaging is often substituted for head CT in multiply imaged patients with shunted hydrocephalus. Fast TSE-T2 sequences are commonly used in these protocols. One limitation of TSE-T2 sequences is the decreased catheter delineation compared with CT. The aim of this study was to compare fast TSE-T2 with rapid SS-GRE sequences in the evaluation of intracranial shunt catheter delineation as part of a rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR imaging protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the findings from 179 consecutive patients who underwent routine clinical imaging according to the rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR imaging protocol. Comparison of the quality of intracranial shunt catheter localization on SS-GRE versus TSE-T2 was performed.

RESULTS: Of the total of 179 rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR images that were reviewed, 62 (35%) had an intracranial shunt catheter. The shunt catheter tip was better localized on the SS-GRE than on the TSE-T2 images in 49/62 (79%) of these patients. Of the remaining 13/62 (21%), the TSE-T2 was either better or equivalent in localizing the shunt catheter tip.

CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that rapid SS-GRE sequences can provide better delineation of standard intracranial shunt catheters than standard rapid MR imaging protocols containing only fast TSE-T2 sequences.

Abbreviations

FA
flip angle
FID
free induction decay
FSE
fast spin-echo
GRE
gradient recalled-echo
RIS
Radiology Information System
SS-GRE
steady-state gradient recalled-echo
TSE-T2
T2 turbo spin-echo

CT is generally the preferred imaging technique in the assessment of patients with intracranial shunt catheters. Despite the ease of CT scanning, the delayed risks of childhood radiation are not negligible.1–3 The emergence of rapid MR imaging as a substitute for CT has been influenced by the movement to reduce radiation in these multiply scanned patients. Fast TSE-T2 sequences are commonly used in rapid brain MR imaging.4–8 Despite their utility, at least 2 limitations have been described. One is the lack of sensitivity in identification of extra-axial and parenchymal blood products.9,10 The other is decreased catheter delineation compared with CT.8

One possible remedy to the problem is the addition of GRE sequences to supplement the standard single-shot TSE-T2 sequences of rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR imaging protocols. These sequences are known to be more sensitive to the susceptibility effects of blood products.9,10 To our knowledge, the utility of these sequences in catheter delineation has not been previously reported. Because these sequences are additions to a brain protocol that necessitates a short scanning time, rapid SS-GRE sequences are preferred over the standard GRE sequences with longer TRs.11,12

The aim of this study was to compare fast TSE-T2 imaging with rapid SS-GRE sequences in the evaluation of intracranial shunt catheter delineation as part of a rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR imaging protocol.

Materials and Methods

The local institutional review board granted this retrospective study an exemption from obtaining informed consent from participants.

We evaluated the findings from 179 consecutive patients who underwent routine clinical imaging according to the rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging protocol.

Imaging Parameters

The subjects were imaged by using a 1.5T Intera MR imaging scanner with a 4-channel sensitivity encoding coil (Philips Medical Systems, Best, the Netherlands). They underwent single-shot TSE-T2 imaging (matrix size, 256 × 205; FOV 24; TR/TE/turbo factor, 1500 ms/120 ms/76; 5-mm section thickness; approximately 25 sections; imaging time, approximately 30 seconds) performed in the axial, sagittal, and coronal planes. They also underwent fast postexcitation refocused SS-GRE imaging (matrix size, 256 × 205; FOV 24; TR/TE, 480 ms/14 ms; FA 18°; 5-mm section thickness; approximately 25 sections; imaging time, approximately 30 seconds) performed in the axial and coronal planes. The rationale for adding a coronal SS-GRE sequence in addition to the axial sequence is addressed in the Discussion. The total scanning time was approximately 150 seconds (Fig 1).

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR imaging protocol. The upper row contains TSE-T2-weighted MR images. The bottom row has fast SS-GRE MR images. The total imaging time was approximately 150 seconds.

Image Assessment

Two pediatric neuroradiologists (J.H.M., T.W.) reviewed the indications and findings of 179 consecutive patients who underwent routine clinical imaging according to our rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging protocol. The images were viewed on a Centricity PACS (GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wisconsin). The neuroradiologists viewed the imaging findings and compared the TSE-T2 and SS-GRE imaging for the following: 1) the presence of an intracranial shunt catheter, and 2) the quality of shunt catheter tip localization (better/worse/equally well localized on the GRE sequences compared with the SS-TSE sequences). If localization of the catheter tip was better or equivalent on TSE-T2 compared with SS-GRE sequence, note was made if this difference was due to artifacts.

Assessment of the Clinical Impact of Rapid Nonsedated Brain MR Imaging Protocol Modification

An automated search of the RIS was performed to determine the number of head CT and rapid brain MR imaging orders placed before and after the addition of SS-GRE sequences to the rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging protocol. This search was limited to orders placed by the neurosurgery department for the indication of “hydrocephalus.” Orders placed from the emergency department were excluded because the availability of MR imaging technologists at the time of the order may have influenced the imaging preference. The percentage of total neuroimaging studies that were head CT versus rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging was compared for the 4-month period before and after the protocol addition of SS-GRE sequences.

Results

Rapid Nonsedated Brain MR Imaging Assessment

A total of 179 rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR images were reviewed. The mean age of the patients at the time of examination was 4 years. The youngest patient was scanned on day 1 of life, and the oldest was 17 years of age. Most patients were younger than 5 years of age (128, 71%). Of the remaining patients, 37 (21%) were 5–10 years of age and 14 (8%) were older than 10 years of age.

There were 62 (35%) patients with an intracranial shunt catheter. The shunt catheter tip was better localized on the SS-GRE than on the TSE-T2 images in 49/62 (79%) of these patients (Figs 2⇓–4). Of the remaining 13/62 (21%), the TSE-T2 sequence was either better or equivalent in localizing the shunt catheter tip. In these patients, there were 2 factors that resulted in greater or equal conspicuity of the catheter tip on TSE-T2 sequences compared with SS-GRE images. In 6 patients, the SS-GRE sequences were nondiagnostic due to patient motion or artifacts from the shunt or reservoir (Fig 5). In the other 7 patients, the degree of ventriculomegaly was at least moderate in severity and the catheter was well positioned within the ventricle. This particular combination of factors provided the most optimal contrast-resolution conditions for localizing the hypointense catheter tip within the hyperintense CSF on TSE-T2 imaging.

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

A representative sample in which SS-GRE is better than TSE-T2 for localizing the ventricular catheter tip. The upper row has TSE-T2-weighted MR images; and the lower row, SS-GRE MR images. The catheter is inserted from a right frontal approach and travels posterolaterally to the left. On TSE-T2-weighted MR images, the exact delineation of the catheter is not certain. On SS-GRE MR images, the entirety of the catheter can be identified with its tip ending in the left posterior periventricular white matter (curved arrow).

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Comparison of fast SS-GRE MR images with standard T2-weighted MR images for localization of the ventricular catheter tip. On the standard T2-weighted MR image and the SS-GRE MR image, the catheter tip is easily identified in the right frontal white matter (curved arrows). The tip is less conspicuous on the faster TSE T2-weighted MR image.

Fig 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 4.

Comparison of fast SS-GRE MR images with CT for localization of the ventricular catheter tip. The catheter tip is visible within the right frontal horn on CT as well as on SS-GRE MR images (curved arrow). On fast TSE-T2-weighted MR images, the catheter tip is not as readily identified.

Fig 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 5.

Artifacts secondary to the shunt reservoir. The SS-GRE MR image is the most affected by these artifacts. There are lesser degrees of susceptibility on the fast TSE-T2-weighted and standard T2-weighted MR images, respectively.

Clinical Impact of Rapid Nonsedated Brain MR Imaging Protocol Modification

A RIS search during an 8-month period yielded a total of 159 neuroimaging studies ordered by the neurosurgery department for the indication of “hydrocephalus.” This total did not include those orders placed from the emergency department. This time period consisted of the 4 months before and then the 4 months after the addition of SS-GRE sequences to the rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging protocol. Within the preprotocol modification period, 90 neuroimaging studies were performed. Of these studies, 55 (61%) were head CT and 35 (39%) were rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging protocol. After protocol modification, 79 neuroimaging studies were performed. Of these studies, 42 (53%) were head CT and 35 (47%) were rapid nonsedated brain MR imaging protocol. There was no change in the personnel of the ordering neurosurgery department during this time.

Discussion

Greater awareness of the risks of childhood radiation1–3 and campaigns to reduce radiation exposure in pediatrics (ie, Image Gently)13 have resulted in increased interest in substituting rapid brain MR imaging for head CT in multiply imaged patients with certain neurologic conditions (ie, hydrocephalus). Frequently, single-shot TSE-T2 sequences are used.7,8 These sequences are an acceptable substitute for standard multiecho spin-echo T2 sequences due to their similar image contrast resolution with a much shorter imaging time. In these sequences, a number of consecutive 180° radio-frequency pulses are applied per excitation, resulting in the acquisition of multiple spin-echoes per TR.11,12,14 The drawback to these sequences, however, is that the multiple 180° radio-frequency pulses and the short echo spacing result in a reduced sensitivity to susceptibility effects.9–12,14

GRE images have been shown to be more sensitive in the detection of blood products than fast single-shot TSE-T2 sequences.9,10 Our study shows that GRE sequences can additionally provide improved delineation of standard intracranial catheters compared with TSE-T2 sequences. This increased catheter conspicuity is probably related to a combination of increased contrast resolution (catheter versus background) and the intrinsic properties of the catheter. The fast SS-GRE acquisitions, which were used in our study, were performed in significantly less time (30 seconds for fast SS-GRE versus 4 minutes for standard GRE) without significant difference in contrast-to-noise ratio. Generally the axial images alone were sufficient to localize the catheter tip. The additional images in the coronal plane only occasionally provided increased catheter-localization confidence but were often helpful in evaluating other common abnormalities such as extra-axial convexity blood products.

The reduction in scanning time associated with faster GRE sequences over standard GRE sequences is possible due to the decreased TR of fast SS-GRE sequences (for our protocol 480 ms versus 820 ms). Briefly, standard GRE sequences contain an elongated readout gradient duration (and thus a longer TR) to achieve intrinsic transverse magnetization “spoiling.” Fast GRE sequences either actively “spoil” transverse magnetization or refocus it to contribute to a steady-state formation. Both techniques enable application of a shorter TR compared with standard GRE sequences.9–12,14,15,16 The SS-GRE sequences can be further subdivided into 2 categories when it is remembered that the resultant steady-state precession signal intensity is composed of both FID and spin-echo components. The fast SS-GRE sequence used in our rapid nonsedated pediatric brain protocol is the variety that samples the FID (hence the increased conspicuity of susceptibility effects).16 The vendor-specific names for this sequence are fast-field echo (Philips), fast imaging with steady-state precession (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany), and gradient-recalled acquisition in steady-state (GE Healthcare).15

The increased conspicuity of the intracranial shunts and catheters is likely due to a combination of the susceptibility effects of the intrinsic catheter components and by intravoxel phase dispersion caused by the local magnetic field gradients of the internal tubing structure.17–19 Most intracranial shunts and catheters are composed of a hardened silicone elastomer and are impregnated with barium. Briefly, the silicones are synthetic polymers composed of a repeating silicone-oxygen (siloxane) backbone with organic groups attached through silicone-carbon bonds. There is a variable degree of cross-linking of the siloxane backbone, which determines whether the polymer exists in the gel form, as present in breast implants (10% cross-linking), or in the elastomer form of medical-grade tubing (95% cross-linking).20

Although, to our knowledge, there is no review in the literature of the MR imaging properties of medical grade elastomer tubing, an analysis of the MR imaging properties of silicone elastomer orthopedic tendon spacers does exist.20 In this study, the signal intensity of the imaged silicone elastomer on GRE sequences was at least 70% less than the signal intensity on spin-echo T2 images. These authors hypothesized that the signal-intensity reduction was secondary to local magnetic field gradients within the polymer backbone, resulting in intravoxel phase dispersion of mobile protons traveling along the polymer. Additionally, it is possible that another source of intrinsic susceptibility may come from the diamagnetic effects of the barium with which most catheters are impregnated to provide radio-opacity.

Despite the benefits of the fast GRE sequences that were used in this study, the acquisition parameters did result in a few evident limitations. The relatively long acquisition window (compared with other fast SS-GRE sequences) and its multishot excitation profile (compared with TSE-T2 sequences) resulted in an increased sensitivity to patient motion artifacts. This is not a trivial problem in a protocol designed to image a nonsedated patient who already has a low baseline level of cooperation. The increased susceptibility effect of the shunt catheter reservoir itself was also episodically problematic. This was especially evident when it was located at the same level as the shunt. In our study, increased susceptibility artifacts from the shunt reservoir completely obscured visualization of the intracranial aspect of the catheter in 2 patients. However when these artifactual limitations were not encountered, the fast GRE sequences enabled catheter tip localization equivalent to the criterion standards of CT and standard multishot T2 MR imaging.

The clinical impact of improving the delineation of intracranial shunt catheters is difficult to assess. The clinician responsible for managing an individual patient's shunt catheter often has valuable clinical information regarding the insertion and prior position of the catheter as well as its drainage status. With this knowledge, the radiologist's description of the location of the shunt catheter may not impact clinical decision-making. Given this limitation, it is, however, possible that when taking into account the possible long-term radiation risks of multiple CT examinations, clinicians may increasingly consider substituting rapid MR imaging for CT. Continued technical improvement in rapid MR imaging sensitivity and scanning time may help facilitate its diagnostic ability and increased use.

In an attempt to assess the clinical impact of our rapid MR imaging protocol modification (addition of SS-GRE sequences), a limited review of the ordering preference (rapid MR imaging versus head CT) of the neurosurgery department for patients with hydrocephalus was performed. The small increase in the percentage of rapid MR imaging studies ordered for hydrocephalus (47% versus 39%) after adding the SS-GRE sequences may indicate that the added capabilities of the protocol favorably impacted the confidence of the ordering clinicians (neurosurgery) in substituting rapid MR imaging for CT. This trend, although encouraging, will nonetheless require additional monitoring to assess its validity.

Conclusions

Greater awareness of the risks of childhood radiation and campaigns to reduce radiation exposure in pediatrics (ie, Image Gently) have resulted in increased interest in substituting rapid brain MR imaging for head CT. Fast TSE-T2 sequences are accepted and have proved useful as a substitute. Compared with the criterion standard of head CT, these sequences do, however, have a reduced sensitivity in intracranial catheter localization and blood-product detection.

In our study of rapid nonsedated pediatric brain MR imaging, we have demonstrated that intracranial catheters are more conspicuous on rapid SS-GRE than on fast TSE-T2 sequences. Rapid SS-GRE imaging can be performed in significantly less time than standard gradient sequences. This short scanning time and improved catheter delineation, coupled with improved sensitivity to hemorrhage, make rapid SS-GRE sequences a useful addition to the TSE-T2 sequences in rapid pediatric MR imaging brain protocols.

Footnotes

  • Paper previously presented at: Annual Meeting of the Society for Pediatric Radiology, April 21–25, 2009; Carlsbad, California.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Brenner DJ,
    2. Elliston,
    3. Hall EJ,
    4. et al
    . Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:289–96
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Verdun FR,
    2. Bochud F,
    3. Gudinchet F,
    4. et al
    . Quality initiatives: radiation risk—what you should know to tell your patient. Radiographics 2008;28:1807–16
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Brenner DJ
    . Estimating cancer risks from pediatric CT. Pediatr Radiol 2002;32:228–31
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Engelbrecht V,
    2. Malms J,
    3. Kahn T,
    4. et al
    . Fast spin-echo MR imaging of the pediatric brain. Pediatr Radiol 1996;26:259–64
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Penzkofer AK,
    2. Pfluger T,
    3. Pochmann Y,
    4. et al
    . MR imaging of the brain in pediatric patients: diagnostic value of HASTE sequences. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:509–14
    PubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Forbes KP,
    2. Pipe JG,
    3. Karis JP,
    4. et al
    . Brain imaging in the unsedated patient: comparison of periodically rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction and single-shot fast spin-echo sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:794–98
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Ashley WW,
    2. McKinstry RC,
    3. Leonard JR,
    4. et al
    . Use of rapid-sequence magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of hydrocephalus in children. J Neurosurg 2005;103(2 suppl):124–30
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Iskandar BJ,
    2. Sansone JM,
    3. Medow J,
    4. et al
    . The use of quick-brain magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of shunt-treated hydrocephalus. J Neurosurg. 2004;101(2 suppl):147–51
    PubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Liang L,
    2. Korogi Y,
    3. Sugahara T,
    4. et al
    . Detection of intracranial hemorrhage with susceptibility-weighted MR sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1999;20:1527–34
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Jones KM,
    2. Mulkern RV,
    3. Mantello MT
    . Brain hemorrhage: evaluation with fast spin-echo and conventional dual spin-echo images. Radiology 1992;182:53–58
    PubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Stark DD,
    2. Bradley WG
    1. Frahm J,
    2. Haenicke W
    . Rapid scan techniques. In: Stark DD, Bradley WG eds. Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1999:87–124
  12. 12.↵
    1. Haacke EM,
    2. Tkach JA
    . Fast MR imaging: techniques and clinical applications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990;155:951–64
    PubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Goske MJ,
    2. Applegate KE,
    3. Boylan J,
    4. et al
    . The Image Gently campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:273–74
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Vinitski S,
    2. Mitchell DG,
    3. Einstein MS,
    4. et al
    . Conventional and fast spin-echo MR imaging: minimizing echo time. J Magn Reson Imaging 1993;3:501–07
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Elster A
    . Gradient-echo MR imaging: techniques and acronyms. Radiology 1993;186:1–8
    PubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Chavhan GB,
    2. Babyn PS,
    3. Jankharia BG,
    4. et al
    . Steady-state MR imaging sequences: physics, classification and clinical applications. Radiographics 2008;28:1147–60
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Bos C,
    2. Viergever MA,
    3. Bakker CJ
    . On the artifact of a subvoxel susceptibility deviation in spoiled gradient-echo imaging. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:400–04
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Smits HF,
    2. Bos C,
    3. van der Weide R,
    4. et al
    . Interventional MR: vascular applications. Eur Radiol 1999;9:1488–95
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Garrido L,
    2. Mark JE,
    3. Sun CC,
    4. et al
    . NMR characterization of elastomers reinforced with in situ precipitated silica. Macromolecules 1991;24:4067–72
    CrossRef
  20. 20.↵
    1. Kalousdian S,
    2. Karlan MS,
    3. Williams MA
    . Silicone elastomer cerebrospinal fluid shunt systems: Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. Neurosurgery 1998;42:887–92
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received June 22, 2009.
  • Accepted after revision July 26, 2009.
  • Copyright © American Society of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 31 (3)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 31, Issue 3
1 Mar 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Improved Delineation of Ventricular Shunt Catheters Using Fast Steady-State Gradient Recalled-Echo Sequences in a Rapid Brain MR Imaging Protocol in Nonsedated Pediatric Patients
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
J.H. Miller, T. Walkiewicz, R.B. Towbin, J.G. Curran
Improved Delineation of Ventricular Shunt Catheters Using Fast Steady-State Gradient Recalled-Echo Sequences in a Rapid Brain MR Imaging Protocol in Nonsedated Pediatric Patients
American Journal of Neuroradiology Mar 2010, 31 (3) 430-435; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A1866

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Improved Delineation of Ventricular Shunt Catheters Using Fast Steady-State Gradient Recalled-Echo Sequences in a Rapid Brain MR Imaging Protocol in Nonsedated Pediatric Patients
J.H. Miller, T. Walkiewicz, R.B. Towbin, J.G. Curran
American Journal of Neuroradiology Mar 2010, 31 (3) 430-435; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A1866
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Abbreviations
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Variable Refocusing Flip Angle Single-Shot Imaging for Sedation-Free Fast Brain MRI
  • Rapid-Sequence MRI of the Brain: A Distinct Imaging Study
  • Diagnostic Performance of Ultrafast Brain MRI for Evaluation of Abusive Head Trauma
  • Retrospective Review of Rapid Pediatric Brain MR Imaging at an Academic Institution Including Practice Trends and Factors Affecting Scan Times
  • Radiation Risk Due to Shunted Hydrocephalus and the Role of MR Imaging-Safe Programmable Valves
  • Strengthening the Argument for Rapid Brain MR Imaging: Estimation of Reduction in Lifetime Attributable Risk of Developing Fatal Cancer in Children with Shunted Hydrocephalus by Instituting a Rapid Brain MR Imaging Protocol in Lieu of Head CT
  • Crossref (28)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Strengthening the Argument for Rapid Brain MR Imaging: Estimation of Reduction in Lifetime Attributable Risk of Developing Fatal Cancer in Children with Shunted Hydrocephalus by Instituting a Rapid Brain MR Imaging Protocol in Lieu of Head CT
    K. Koral, T. Blackburn, A.A. Bailey, K.M. Koral, J. Anderson
    American Journal of Neuroradiology 2012 33 10
  • Fast-brain MRI in children is quick, without sedation, and radiation-free, but beware of limitations
    Katya Rozovsky, Enrique C.G. Ventureyra, Elka Miller
    Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 2013 20 3
  • Trends in Use of Advanced Imaging in Pediatric Emergency Departments, 2009-2018
    Jennifer R. Marin, Jonathan Rodean, Matt Hall, Elizabeth R. Alpern, Paul L. Aronson, Pradip P. Chaudhari, Eyal Cohen, Stephen B. Freedman, Rustin B. Morse, Alon Peltz, Margaret Samuels-Kalow, Samir S. Shah, Harold K. Simon, Mark I. Neuman
    JAMA Pediatrics 2020 174 9
  • Diagnostic Performance of Ultrafast Brain MRI for Evaluation of Abusive Head Trauma
    S.F. Kralik, M. Yasrebi, N. Supakul, C. Lin, L.G. Netter, R.A. Hicks, R.A. Hibbard, L.L. Ackerman, M.L. Harris, C.Y. Ho
    American Journal of Neuroradiology 2017 38 4
  • Retrospective Review of Rapid Pediatric Brain MR Imaging at an Academic Institution Including Practice Trends and Factors Affecting Scan Times
    B.D. Niederhauser, R.J. McDonald, L.J. Eckel, G.F. Keating, E.M. Broomall, N.M. Wetjen, F.E. Diehn, K.M. Schwartz, C.H. Hunt, K.M. Welker, D.F. Kallmes
    American Journal of Neuroradiology 2013 34 9
  • Estimation of effective dose and lifetime attributable risk from multiple head CT scans in ventriculoperitoneal shunted children
    J. Aw-Zoretic, D. Seth, G. Katzman, S. Sammet
    European Journal of Radiology 2014 83 10
  • Results of a North American survey of rapid-sequence MRI utilization to evaluate cerebral ventricles in children
    Eric M. Thompson, Lissa C. Baird, Nathan R. Selden
    Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics 2014 13 6
  • Reduced Radiation in Children Presenting to the ED With Suspected Ventricular Shunt Complication
    Ronald F. Marchese, Erin S. Schwartz, Gregory G. Heuer, Jane Lavelle, Jimmy W. Huh, Louis M. Bell, Xianqun Luan, Joseph J. Zorc
    Pediatrics 2017 139 5
  • Magnetic resonance imaging acquisition techniques intended to decrease movement artefact in paediatric brain imaging: a systematic review
    Julie Woodfield, Susan Kealey
    Pediatric Radiology 2015 45 9
  • Rapid-sequence brain magnetic resonance imaging for Chiari I abnormality
    James Pan, Jennifer L. Quon, Eli Johnson, Bryan Lanzman, Anjeza Chukus, Allen L. Ho, Michael S. B. Edwards, Gerald A. Grant, Kristen W. Yeom
    Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics 2018 22 2

More in this TOC Section

  • SyMRI & MR Fingerprinting in Brainstem Myelination
  • Comparison of Image Quality and Radiation Dose in Pediatric Temporal Bone CT Using Photon-Counting Detector CT and Energy-Integrating Detector CT
  • ASL in PEDS Nontraumatic Orbital Lesions
Show more Pediatrics

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire