Synthetic MRI in Neurofibromatosis Type 1

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Van Es S,
   2. North KN,
   3. McHugh K, et al

   . MRI findings in children with neurofibromatosis type 1: a prospective study. Pediatr Radiol 1996;26:478–87 doi:10.1007/BF01377205 pmid:8662066

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. The I,
   2. Hannigan GE,
   3. Cowley GS, et al

   . Rescue of a Drosophila NF1 mutant phenotype by protein kinase A. Science 1997;276:791–94 doi:10.1126/science.276.5313.791 pmid:9115203

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Moore BD 3rd.,
   2. Slopis JM,
   3. Jackson EF, et al

   . Brain volume in children with neurofibromatosis type 1: relation to neuropsychological status. Neurology 2000;54:914–20 doi:10.1212/WNL.54.4.914 pmid:10690986

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. López-Juárez A,
   2. Titus HE,
   3. Silbak SH, et al

   . Oligodendrocyte Nf1 controls aberrant notch activation and regulates myelin structure and behavior. Cell Rep 2017;19:545–57 doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2017.03.073 pmid:28423318

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. DiPaolo DP,
   2. Zimmerman RA,
   3. Rorke LB, et al

   . Neurofibromatosis type 1: pathologic substrate of high-signal-intensity foci in the brain. Radiology 1995;195:721–24 doi:10.1148/radiology.195.3.7754001

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Menor F,
   2. Marti-Bonmati L,
   3. Arana E, et al

   . Neurofibromatosis type 1 in children: MR imaging and follow-up studies of central nervous system findings. Eur J Radiol 1998;26:121–31 doi:10.1016/S0720-048X(97)00088-0 pmid:9518221

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Warntjes JB,
   2. Leinhard OD,
   3. West J, et al

   . Rapid magnetic resonance quantification on the brain: optimization for clinical usage. Magn Reson Med 2008;60:320–29 doi:10.1002/mrm.21635 pmid:18666127

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Krauss W,
   2. Gunnarsson M,
   3. Andersson T, et al

   . Accuracy and reproducibility of a quantitative magnetic resonance imaging method for concurrent measurements of tissue relaxation times and proton density. Magn Reson Imaging 2015;33:584–91 doi:10.1016/j.mri.2015.02.013 pmid:25708264

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Hagiwara A,
   2. Hori M,
   3. Yokoyama K, et al

   . Utility of a multiparametric quantitative MRI model that assesses myelin and edema for evaluating plaques, periplaque white matter, and normal-appearing white matter in patients with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:237–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4977 pmid:27789453

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    1. Andica C,
    2. Hagiwara A,
    3. Nakazawa M, et al

    . The advantage of synthetic MRI for the visualization of early white matter change in an infant with Sturge-Weber syndrome. Magn Reson Med Sci 2016;15:347–48 doi:10.2463/mrms.ci.2015-0164 pmid:27001386

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Virhammar J,
    2. Warntjes M,
    3. Laurell K, et al

    . Quantitative MRI for rapid and user-independent monitoring of intracranial CSF volume in hydrocephalus. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:797–801 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4627 pmid:26705322

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Krauss W,
    2. Gunnarsson M,
    3. Nilsson M, et al

    . Conventional and synthetic MRI in multiple sclerosis: a comparative study. Eur Radiol 2018;28:1692–700 doi:10.1007/s00330-017-5100-9 pmid:29134354

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Sevick RJ,
    2. Barkovich AJ,
    3. Edwards MS, et al

    . Evolution of white matter lesions in neurofibromatosis type 1: MR findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992;159:171–75 doi:10.2214/ajr.159.1.1609692 pmid:1609692

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Andica C,
    2. Hagiwara A,
    3. Hori M, et al

    . Automated brain tissue and myelin volumetry based on quantitative MR imaging with various in-plane resolutions. J Neuroradiol 2018;45:164–68 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2017.10.002 pmid:29132939

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Warntjes M,
    2. Engström M,
    3. Tisell A, et al

    . Modeling the presence of myelin and edema in the brain based on multi-parametric quantitative MRI. Front Neurol 2016;7:16 doi:10.3389/fneur.2016.00016 pmid:26925030

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Benjamini Y,
    2. Hochberg Y

    . Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 1995;57:289–300

    CrossRefWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Blystad I,
    2. Warntjes JB,
    3. Smedby O, et al

    . Synthetic MRI of the brain in a clinical setting. Acta Radiol 2012;53:1158–63 doi:10.1258/ar.2012.120195 pmid:23024181

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Tanenbaum LN,
    2. Tsiouris AJ,
    3. Johnson AN, et al

    . Synthetic MRI for clinical neuroimaging: results of the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) prospective, multicenter, multireader trial. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:1103–10 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5227 pmid:28450439

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Kerleroux B,
    2. Kober T,
    3. Hilbert T, et al

    . Clinical equivalence assessment of T2 synthesized pediatric brain magnetic resonance imaging. J Neuroradiol 2019;46:130–35 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2018.04.003 pmid:29733917

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Said SM,
    2. Yeh TL,
    3. Greenwood RS, et al

    . MRI morphometric analysis and neuropsychological function in patients with neurofibromatosis. Neuroreport 1996;7:1941–44 doi:10.1097/00001756-199608120-00015 pmid:8905698

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    1. West J,
    2. Aalto A,
    3. Tisell A, et al

    . Normal appearing and diffusely abnormal white matter in patients with multiple sclerosis assessed with quantitative MR. PLoS One 2014;9:e95161 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0095161 pmid:24747946

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Saccenti L,
    2. Hagiwara A,
    3. Andica C, et al

    . Myelin measurement using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: a correlation study comparing various imaging techniques in patients with multiple sclerosis. Cells 2020;9:393 doi:10.3390/cells9020393 pmid:32046340

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Tognini G,
    2. Ferrozzi F,
    3. Garlaschi G, et al

    . Brain apparent diffusion coefficient evaluation in pediatric patients with neurofibromatosis type 1. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29:298–304 doi:10.1097/01.rct.0000162406.71300.b7 pmid:15891494

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Zamboni SL,
    2. Loenneker T,
    3. Boltshauser E, et al

    . Contribution of diffusion tensor MR imaging in detecting cerebral microstructural changes in adults with neurofibromatosis type 1. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;1:773 pmid:17416837

    PubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Wang L,
    2. Goldstein FC,
    3. Veledar E, et al

    . Alterations in cortical thickness and white matter integrity in mild cognitive impairment measured by whole-brain cortical thickness mapping and diffusion tensor imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:893–99 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1484 pmid:19279272

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. Karlsgodt KH,
    2. Rosser T,
    3. Lutkenhoff ES, et al

    . Alterations in white matter microstructure in neurofibromatosis-1. PLoS One 2012;7:e47854 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047854 pmid:23094098

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Song SK,
    2. Sun SW,
    3. Ramsbottom MJ, et al

    . Dysmyelination revealed through MRI as increased radial (but unchanged axial) diffusion of water. Neuroimage 2002;17:1429–36 doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1267 pmid:12414282

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    1. Wilkinson ID,
    2. Griffiths PD,
    3. Wales JK

    . Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of brain lesions in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Magn Reson Imaging 2001;19:1081–89 doi:10.1016/S0730-725X(01)00446-5 pmid:11711232

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Jones AP,
    2. Gunawardena WJ,
    3. Coutinho CM

    . 1H MR spectroscopy evidence for the varied nature of asymptomatic focal brain lesions in neurofibromatosis type 1. Neuroradiology 2001;43:62–67 doi:10.1007/s002340000388 pmid:11214651

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    1. Ferraz-Filho JR,
    2. da Rocha AJ,
    3. Muniz MP, et al

    . Diffusion tensor MR imaging in neurofibromatosis type 1: expanding the knowledge of microstructural brain abnormalities. Pediatr Radiol 2012;42:449–54 doi:10.1007/s00247-011-2274-1 pmid:22033857

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. van Engelen SJ,
    2. Krab LC,
    3. Moll HA, et al

    . Quantitative differentiation between healthy and disordered brain matter in patients with neurofibromatosis type I using diffusion tensor imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:816–22 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0921 pmid:18339726

    CrossRefPubMed