Advertisement

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

Improved Turnaround Times | Median time to first decision: 12 days

Research ArticleSpine Imaging and Spine Image-Guided Interventions

Comparison of Sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-Weighted Phase-Sensitive Inversion Recovery in the Detection of Spinal Cord Lesions in MS at 3T

P. Alcaide-Leon, A. Pauranik, L. Alshafai, S. Rawal, J. Oh, W. Montanera, G. Leung and A. Bharatha
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2016, 37 (5) 970-975; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4656

References

  1. 1.↵
    2. Brex PA,
    3. O'Riordan JI,
    4. Miszkiel KA, et al
    . Multisequence MRI in clinically isolated syndromes and the early development of MS. Neurology 1999;53:1184–90 doi:10.1212/WNL.53.6.1184 pmid:10522870
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    2. Ikuta F,
    3. Zimmerman HM
    . Distribution of plaques in seventy autopsy cases of multiple sclerosis in the United States. Neurology 1976;26:26–28 doi:10.1212/WNL.26.6_Part_2.26 pmid:944889
    FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    2. Nijeholt GJ,
    3. van Walderveen MA,
    4. Castelijns JA, et al
    . Brain and spinal cord abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: correlation between MRI parameters, clinical subtypes and symptoms. Brain 1998;121(pt 4):687–97 doi:10.1093/brain/121.4.687 pmid:9577394
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    2. Bot JC,
    3. Barkhof F,
    4. Lycklama à Nijeholt G, et al
    . Differentiation of multiple sclerosis from other inflammatory disorders and cerebrovascular disease: value of spinal MR imaging. Radiology 2002;223:46–56 doi:10.1148/radiol.2231010707 pmid:11930047
    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    2. Bot JC,
    3. Barkhof F,
    4. Polman CH, et al
    . Spinal cord abnormalities in recently diagnosed MS patients: added value of spinal MRI examination. Neurology 2004;62:226–33 doi:10.1212/WNL.62.2.226 pmid:14745058
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    2. Sombekke MH,
    3. Wattjes MP,
    4. Balk LJ, et al
    . Spinal cord lesions in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: a powerful tool in diagnosis and prognosis. Neurology 2013;80:69–75 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827b1a67 pmid:23243070
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    2. Thorpe JW,
    3. Kidd D,
    4. Moseley IF, et al
    . Spinal MRI in patients with suspected multiple sclerosis and negative brain MRI. Brain 1996;119(pt 3):709–14 doi:10.1093/brain/119.3.709 pmid:8673484
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    2. Mikulis DJ,
    3. Wood ML,
    4. Zerdoner OA, et al
    . Oscillatory motion of the normal cervical spinal cord. Radiology 1994;192:117–21 doi:10.1148/radiology.192.1.8208922 pmid:8208922
    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    2. Yang QX,
    3. Wang J,
    4. Zhang X, et al
    . Analysis of wave behavior in lossy dielectric samples at high field. Magn Reson Med 2002;47:982–89 doi:10.1002/mrm.10137 pmid:11979578
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    2. Phalke VV,
    3. Gujar S,
    4. Quint DJ
    . Comparison of 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MR: imaging of the spine. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2006;16:241–48, ix pmid:16731363
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    2. Fries P,
    3. Runge VM,
    4. Kirchin MA, et al
    . Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine at 3 Tesla. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2008;12:238–52 doi:10.1055/s-0028-1083107 pmid:18850504
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    2. Filippi CG,
    3. Carlson M,
    4. Johnson JM, et al
    . Improvements in lumbar spine MRI at 3 T using parallel transmission. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:861–67 doi:10.2214/AJR.11.8139 pmid:22997379
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    2. Bot JC,
    3. Barkhof F,
    4. Lycklama à Nijeholt GJ, et al
    . Comparison of a conventional cardiac-triggered dual spin-echo and a fast STIR sequence in detection of spinal cord lesions in multiple sclerosis. Eur Radiol 2000;10:753–58 doi:10.1007/s003300050998 pmid:10823627
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    2. Hittmair K,
    3. Mallek R,
    4. Prayer D, et al
    . Spinal cord lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis: comparison of MR pulse sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1996;17:1555–65 pmid:8883656
    Abstract
  15. 15.↵
    2. Philpott C,
    3. Brotchie P
    . Comparison of MRI sequences for evaluation of multiple sclerosis of the cervical spinal cord at 3 T. Eur J Radiol 2011;80:780–85 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.09.031 pmid:21041051
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    2. Poonawalla AH,
    3. Hou P,
    4. Nelson FA, et al
    . Cervical spinal cord lesions in multiple sclerosis: T1-weighted inversion-recovery MR imaging with phase-sensitive reconstruction. Radiology 2008;246:258–64 doi:10.1148/radiol.2463061900 pmid:17991786
    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    2. Rocca MA,
    3. Mastronardo G,
    4. Horsfield MA, et al
    . Comparison of three MR sequences for the detection of cervical cord lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1999;20:1710–16 pmid:10543646
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    2. Campi A,
    3. Pontesilli S,
    4. Gerevini S, et al
    . Comparison of MRI pulse sequences for investigation of lesions of the cervical spinal cord. Neuroradiology 2000;42:669–75 doi:10.1007/s002340000368 pmid:11071441
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    2. Mascalchi M,
    3. Dal Pozzo G,
    4. Bartolozzi C
    . Effectiveness of the short TI inversion recovery (STIR) sequence in MR imaging of intramedullary spinal lesions. Magn Reson Imaging 1993;11:17–25 doi:10.1016/0730-725X(93)90407-5 pmid:8423717
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    2. Landis JR,
    3. Koch GG
    . The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74 doi:10.2307/2529310 pmid:843571
    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    2. Julious SA
    . Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods by Robert G. Newcombe, Statistics in Medicine 1998;17:857–872. Stat Med 2005;24:3383–84 pmid:16206245
    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  22. 22.↵
    2. Moran PR,
    3. Kumar NG,
    4. Karstaedt N, et al
    . Tissue contrast enhancement: image reconstruction algorithm and selection of TI in inversion recovery MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 1986;4:229–35 doi:10.1016/0730-725X(86)91062-3 pmid:3669934
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    2. Riederer I,
    3. Karampinos DC,
    4. Settles M, et al
    . Double inversion recovery sequence of the cervical spinal cord in multiple sclerosis and related inflammatory diseases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:219–25 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4093 pmid:25169924
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    2. Nair G,
    3. Absinta M,
    4. Reich DS
    . Optimized T1-MPRAGE sequence for better visualization of spinal cord multiple sclerosis lesions at 3T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:2215–22 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3637 pmid:23764721
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    2. Dietemann JL,
    3. Thibaut-Menard A,
    4. Warter JM, et al
    . MRI in multiple sclerosis of the spinal cord: evaluation of fast short-tau inversion-recovery and spin-echo sequences. Neuroradiology 2000;42:810–13 doi:10.1007/s002340000429 pmid:11151685
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    2. Nayak NB,
    3. Salah R,
    4. Huang JC, et al
    . A comparison of sagittal short T1 inversion recovery and T2-weighted FSE sequences for detection of multiple sclerosis spinal cord lesions. Acta Neurol Scand 2014;129:198–203 doi:10.1111/ane.12168 pmid:23980614
    CrossRefPubMed
Back to top

In this issue

Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Cite this article
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Bookmark this article
Comparison of Sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-Weighted Phase-Sensitive Inversion Recovery in the Detection of Spinal Cord Lesions in MS at 3T
P. Alcaide-Leon, A. Pauranik, L. Alshafai, S. Rawal, J. Oh, W. Montanera, G. Leung, A. Bharatha
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2016, 37 (5) 970-975; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4656
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Purchase

Jump to section

Advertisement