PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

T A Mallisee

Publications and source records attributed to T A Mallisee.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Multiphase hepatic CT with a multirow detector CT scanner.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate a new injection-acquisition technique performed using a multirow detector CT scanner for separation of three distinct hepatic circulatory phases (hepatic artery, portal venous inflow, hepatic venous) and to determine which of these phases is optimal for detecting hypervascular neoplasm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two sequential acquisitions were performed during a single breath-hold followed by a third acquisition beginning 60 sec after injection. Injection-to-scan delay for the first acquisition was the individual patient's circulation time, which was determined by a preliminary mini bolus. The mean attenuation of the upper abdominal aorta, portal vein, and hepatic parenchyma were determined for each imaging pass in 20 patients with cirrhosis and 20 patients without cirrhosis. Tumor-to-liver contrast for hypervascular primary and metastatic neoplasm was evaluated in a different set of 16 cirrhotic patients and nine noncirrhotic patients. Three-dimensional CT arteriograms were obtained from first-pass data. RESULTS: Three distinct circulatory phases (hepatic artery, portal vein inflow or late arterial, and hepatic venous) were seen in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients. Maximum tumor-to-liver contrast for hypervascular primary and metastatic neoplasm occurred during the second pass for both cirrhotic (p < 0.006) and noncirrhotic (p < 0. 001) patients. A three-dimensional hepatic-mesenteric CT arteriogram of normal or anomalous hepatic vessels without venous overlay was obtained from first-pass data in all patients. CONCLUSION: Rapid-sequence hepatic helical CT allows selection of the optimal time interval for hypervascular tumor detection. A new paradigm for rapid hepatic CT acquisition-namely, hepatic arterial, portal vein inflow, and hepatic venous phases-is recommended to replace hepatic artery dominant and portal venous phases.

Adult↗

Normal MR imaging anatomy of the elbow.

This article discusses the normal, clinically relevant MR imaging anatomy of the elbow. A compartmental approach is utilized to help simplify this anatomically complex region. Imaging techniques, common anatomic variants, and imaging pitfalls are also briefly discussed.

Elbow Joint↗

Rotator cuff: evaluation with US and MR imaging.

Magnetic resonance (MR) and ultrasound (US) imaging are currently touted for assessment of rotator cuff disease. Optimum clinical imaging techniques include use of (a) a 1.5-T MR imaging unit with small planar coils, proton-density-weighted and T2-weighted fast spin-echo sequences, and 10-12-cm fields of view (yielding 400-470 x 500-625-microm in-plane spatial resolution) and (b) a state-of-the-art commercial US unit with insonation frequencies of 9-13 MHz (yielding 200-400-microm axial and lateral resolution). Proper diagnosis requires familiarity with normal anatomic characteristics and imaging pitfalls. Care must be taken to avoid sonographic tendon anisotropy and MR imaging magic angle effects, which can be misinterpreted as rotator cuff tear. At MR imaging, a complete cuff tear typically appears as either a hyperintense defect or a tendinous avulsion that extends from the bursal to the articular side of the cuff; a partial cuff tear typically appears as a focal hyperintense region that contacts only one surface of the cuff. Complete and partial tears manifest with a wide spectrum of findings at US. MR imaging and US are effective for evaluating rotator cuff injuries, with high reported accuracies for detection of complete tears but more disparate results for detection of partial tears.

Artifacts↗