Becken

  • D. MacVicar
  • P. Revell
  • F.-A. Stichnoth

Zusammenfassung

Die Becken-MRT ist einfach durchführbar, da es im Becken technisch deutlich weniger Probleme gibt als in einigen anderen Organarealen. Atemartefakte sind minimal, weil das Becken weit genug vom Diaphragma entfernt ist. Artefakte durch die Magen-Darm-Peristaltik können pharmakologisch beherrscht werden, und eine gut gefullte Blase sowie eine gute Lagerung können helfen, den mobilen Dünndarm aus dem Untersuchungsfeld herauszuhalten. Em modernes Hochfeldsystem (1,0–1,5 Tesla) ist ideal für die Beckenbildgebung. Trotzdem können klinisch akzeptable Bilder auch oft mit Niedrigfeldsystemen mit verlangerter Messzeit gewonnen werden.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Weiterführende Literatur

  1. Allen KS, Kressel HY, Arger PH, Pollack HM (1989) Age-related changes of the prostate. Am J Roentgenol 152:77–81Google Scholar
  2. Ascher SM, Arnold LL, Patt RH et al. (1994) Adenomyosis: prospective comparison of MR imaging and transvaginal sonography. Radiology 190:803–806PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Balfe D, Semin M (1998) Colorectal cancer. In: Husband JE, Reznek RH (eds) Imaging in oncology. ISIS Medical Media, Oxford, pp 129–150Google Scholar
  4. Barentsz JO, Ruijs SHJ, Strijk SP (1993) The role of MR imaging in carcinoma of the urinary bladder. Am J Roentgenol 160:937–947Google Scholar
  5. Barker PG, Lunniss PJ, Armstrong P et al. (1994) Magnetic resonance imaging of fistula-in-ano: technique, interpretation and accuracy. Clin Radiol 49:7–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown G, MacVicar D, Ayton V, Husband J (1995) The role of intravenous contrast enhancement in magnetic resonance imaging of prostatic carcinoma. Clin Radiol 50:601–606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown G, Richards C, Dallimore NS et al.(1999) Rectal carcinoma: thin section MR imaging for staging in 28 patients. Radiology 211:215–222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chang YCF, Hricak H, Thurnher S, Lacey C (1988) Vagina: evaluation with MR imaging. Part II. Neoplasms. Radiology 169: 175–179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. DeSouza NM, Scoones D, Krausz T, Gilderdale DJ, Soutter WP (1996) High-resolution MR imaging of stage I cervical neoplasia with a dedicated transvaginal coil: MR features and correlation of imaging and pathologic findings. Am J Roentgenol 166: 553–559Google Scholar
  10. Hall TB, MacVicar AD (2001) Imaging bladder cancer. Imaging 13:1–10Google Scholar
  11. Halligan S (1998) Imaging fistula-in-ano. Clin Radiol 53: 85–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Halligan S, Healy JC, Bartram CI (1998) Magnetic resonance imaging of fistula-in-ano: STIR or SPIR? Br J Radiol 71:141–145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Heald RJ, Ryall RD (1986) Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet 1:1479–1482PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hricak H, Chang YCF, Thurnher S (1988) Vagina: evaluation with MR imaging. Part I. Normal anatomy and congenital anomalies. Radiology 169:169–174PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, Chang YC, Winkler ML, Stern JL (1988) Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 166:623–631PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Husband JE (1998) Bladder cancer. In: Husband JE, Reznek RH (eds) Imaging in oncology. ISIS Medical Media, Oxford, pp 215–238Google Scholar
  17. Jager G, Barentsz J (1998) Prostate cancer. In: Husband JE, Reznek RH (eds) Imaging in oncology. ISIS Medical Media, Oxford, pp 239–257Google Scholar
  18. MacVicar D, Husband J (1993) Imaging in the management of prostatic cancer. Imaging 5:29–37Google Scholar
  19. McDermott VG, Meakem III TJ, Stolpen AH, Schnall MD (1995) Prostatic and periprostatic cysts: findings on MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 164:123–127Google Scholar
  20. Padhani AR, MacVicar AD, Gapinski CJ et al. (2001) Effects of androgen deprivation on prostatic morphology and vascular permeability evaluated with MR imaging. Radiology 218: 365–374PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Quinn S, Franzini D, Demlow T, Rosencrantz D, Kim J, Hanna RA, Szumowski J (1994) MR imaging of prostate cancer with an endorectal surface coil technique: correlation with whole mountspecimens. Radiology 190:323–327PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Reinhold C, McCarthy S, Bret PM et al. (1996) Diffuse adenomyosis: comparison of endovaginal US and MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 199:151–158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Scoutt LM, McCauley TR, Flynn SD, Luthringer DJ, McCarthy SM (1993) Zonal anatomy of the cervix: correlation of MR imaging and histologic examination of hysterectomy specimens. Radiology 186:159–162PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Scoutt LM, McCarthy SM, Flynn SD et al. (1995) Clinical stage I endometrial carcinoma: pitfalls in preoperative assessment with MR imaging. Radiology 194:567–572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Semelka RC, Ascher SM, Reinhold C (eds) (1997) MRI of the abdomen and pelvis. A text atlas. Wiley-Liss, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Sohaib S, Reznek R, Husband JE. Ovarian cancer. In: Husband JE, Reznek RH (eds) Imaging in oncology. ISIS Medical Media, Oxford, pp 277–308Google Scholar
  27. Spencer JA, Ward J, Ambrose NS (1998) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of perianal fistulae. Clin Radiol 53:96–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Subak LL, Hricak H, Powell CB, Azizi L, Stern JL (1995) Cervical carcinoma: computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging. Obstet Gynecol 86:43–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tempany CMC, Fielding JR (1996) Female pelvis. In: Edelman RR, Hesselink JR, Zlatkin MB (eds) Clinical magnetic resonance imaging. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 1432–1465Google Scholar
  30. Umaria N, Olliff JF (2001) Imaging features of pelvic endometriosis. Br J Radiol 74:556–562PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. MacVicar
  • P. Revell
  • F.-A. Stichnoth

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations