Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences 5/2018

16.03.2018 | Paradigm Shifts in Perspective

Contributions of Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Gastroenterological Practice: MRIs for GIs

verfasst von: Christopher G. Roth, Dina Halegoua-De Marzio, Flavius F. Guglielmo

Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Ausgabe 5/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

MRI has transformed from the theoretical, investigative realm to mainstream clinical medicine over the past four decades and has become a core component of the diagnostic toolbox in the practice of gastroenterology (GI). Its success is attributable to exquisite contrast and the ability to isolate specific proton species through the use of different pulse sequences (i.e., T1-weighted, T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted) and exploiting extracellular and hepatobiliary contrast agents. Consequently, MRI has gained preeminence in various GI clinical applications: liver and pancreatic lesion evaluation and detection, liver transplantation evaluation, pancreatitis evaluation, Crohn’s disease evaluation (using MR enterography) rectal cancer staging and perianal fistula evaluation. MR elastography, in concert with technical innovations allowing for fat and iron quantification, provides a noninvasive approach, or “MRI virtual liver biopsy” for diagnosis and management of chronic liver diseases. In the future, the arrival of ultra-high-field MR systems (7 T) and the ability to perform magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the abdomen promise even greater diagnostic insight into chronic liver disease.
Fußnoten
1
T1- and T2-weighted imaging in MRI refers to two different strategies that exploit the unique behavior of different proton species reacting to electromagnetic energy, or radiofrequency pulses, in a strong magnetic field. T1-weighting is accomplished by repeating radiofrequency pulses either very rapidly and/or with high intensity to selectively isolate those protons that rapidly realign their nuclear spin with the main magnetic field (defined as having a low T1 value, which refers to the time elapsed for a proton to achieve 63% realignment with the main magnetic field). T1-weighting favors signal from protons with short T1 values, such as gadolinium and methemoglobin (blood). T2-weighting is accomplished by prolonging the acquisition of data, or the reception of the emitted radiofrequency energy from protons following an radiofrequency pulse to selectively isolate the received signal from proton species retaining relatively greater transverse, or coherent, magnetization as a function of their proton-specific T2 value (which is the time elapsed for 63% of transverse magnetization to decay following excitation by a radiofrequency energy pulse). T2-weighting favors signal from protons with long T2 values, such as water protons.
 
Literatur
1.
2.
3.
Lauterbur P. Image formation by induced local interactions: examples employing nuclear magnetic resonance. Nature. 1973;242:190–191.CrossRef
4.
Mansfield P. Multi-planar image formation using NMR spin echoes. J Phys C Solid State Phys. 1977;10:L55.CrossRef
5.
Edelstein WA, Hutchison JM, Johnson G, Redpath T. Spin warp NMR imaging and applications to human whole-body imaging. Phys Med Biol. 1980;25:751.PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Young I, Clarke G, Baffles D, Pennock J, Doyle F, Bydder G. Enhancement of relaxation rate with paramagnetic contrast agents in NMR imaging. J Comput Tomogr. 1981;5:543–547.PubMedCrossRef
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Merkle EM, Nelson RC. Dual gradient-echo in-phase and opposed-phase hepatic MR imaging: a useful tool for evaluating more than fatty infiltration or fatty sparing. Radiographics. 2006;26:1409–1418.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Jeong YY, Mitchell DG, Holland GA. Liver lesion conspicuity: T2-weighted breath-hold fast spin-echo MR imaging before and after gadolinium enhancement—initial experience. Radiology. 2001;219:455–460.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Ito K, Mitchell DG, Outwater EK, Szklaruk J, Sadek AG. Hepatic lesions: discrimination of nonsolid, benign lesions from solid, malignant lesions with heavily T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging. Radiology.. 1997;204:729–737.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Griffin N, Charles-Edwards G, Grant LA. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: the ABC of MRCP. Insights Imaging. 2012;3:11–21.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Malayeri AA, El Khouli RH, Zaheer A, et al. Principles and applications of diffusion-weighted imaging in cancer detection, staging, and treatment follow-up. Radiographics. 2011;31:1773–1791.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Guglielmo FF, Kania LM, Ahmad HM, Roth CG, Mitchell DG. Interpreting body MRI cases: what you need to know to get started. Abdom Radiol. 2016;41:2248–2269.CrossRef
19.
20.
Guglielmo FF, Mitchell DG, Gupta S. Gadolinium contrast agent selection and optimal use for body MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2014;52:637–656.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Tweedle MF, Kanal E, Muller R. Considerations in the selection of a new gadolinium-based contrast agent. Appl Radiol. 2014;43:1–11.
22.
van der Molen AJ, Bellin MF. Extracellular gadolinium-based contrast media: differences in diagnostic efficacy. Eur J Radiol. 2008;66:168–174.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Frydrychowicz A, Lubner MG, Brown JJ, et al. Hepatobiliary MR imaging with gadolinium-based contrast agents. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35:492–511.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Goodwin MD, Dobson JE, Sirlin CB, Lim BG, Stella DL. Diagnostic challenges and pitfalls in MR imaging with hepatocyte-specific contrast agents. Radiographics. 2011;31:1547–1568.PubMedCrossRef
25.
26.
Hadizadeh DR, Gieseke J, Lohmaier SH, et al. Peripheral MR angiography with blood pool contrast agent: prospective intraindividual comparative study of high-spatial-resolution steady-state MR angiography versus standard-resolution first-pass MR angiography and DSA. Radiology. 2008;249:701–711.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Umschaden HW, Szolar D, Gasser J, Umschaden M, Haselbach H. Small-bowel disease: comparison of MR enteroclysis images with conventional enteroclysis and surgical findings. Radiology. 2000;215:717–725.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Low RN. Abdominal MRI advances in the detection of liver tumours and characterisation. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:525–535.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2277–2284.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Ramalho M, Herédia V, Cardoso C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of small bowel Crohn’s disease. Acta Med Port. 2012;25:231–240.PubMed
31.
Cronin CG, Lohan DG, Browne AM, Roche C, Murphy JM. Does MRI with oral contrast medium allow single-study depiction of inflammatory bowel disease enteritis and colitis? Eur Radiol. 2010;20:1667–1674.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Schwartz DA, Wiersema MJ, Dudiak KM, et al. A comparison of endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and exam under anesthesia for evaluation of Crohn’s perianal fistulas. Gastroenterology. 2001;121:1064–1072.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Froehlich JM, Patak MA, von Weymarn C, Juli CF, Zollikofer CL, Wentz K. Small bowel motility assessment with magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005;21:370–375.PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
Muhi A, Ichikawa T, Motosugi U, et al. Diagnosis of colorectal hepatic metastases: Comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, contrast-enhanced US, superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MRI, and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34:326–335.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Haradome H, Grazioli L, Tsunoo M, Motosugi U, Kwee TC, Takaraha T. Gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced hepatocyte phase MRI: can increasing the flip angle improve focal liver lesion detection? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35:132–139.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Bieze M, van den Esschert JW, Nio CY, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI in differentiating hepatocellular adenoma from focal nodular hyperplasia: prospective study of the additional value of gadoxetate disodium. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:26–34.CrossRef
43.
Grieser C, Steffen IG, Seehofer D, et al. Histopathologically confirmed focal nodular hyperplasia of the liver: gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI characteristics. Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;31:755–760.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Gupta RT, Iseman CM, Leyendecker JR, Shyknevsky I, Merkle EM, Taouli B. Diagnosis of focal nodular hyperplasia with MRI: multicenter retrospective study comparing gadobenate dimeglumine to gadoxetate disodium. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:35–43.CrossRef
45.
Roberts LR, Sirlin CB, Zaiem F, et al. Imaging for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatology. 2018;67:401–421.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Saranathan M, Rettmann DW, Hargreaves BA, et al. Differential subsampling with Cartesian ordering (DISCO): a high spatio-temporal resolution Dixon imaging sequence for multiphasic contrast enhanced abdominal imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35:1484–1492.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
47.
El-Serag HB. Hepatocellular carcinoma: Recent trends in the united states. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:S27–S34.PubMedCrossRef
48.
49.
Fattovich G, Stroffolini T, Zagni I, Donato F. Hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: incidence and risk factors. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:S35–S50.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Llovet JM, Fuster J, Bruix J. Intention-to-treat analysis of surgical treatment for early hepatocellular carcinoma: resection versus transplantation. Hepatology. 1999;30:1434–1440.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Fong Y, Sun RL, Jarnagin W, Blumgart LH. An analysis of 412 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma at a western center. Ann Surg. 1999;229:790–799. (discussion 799–800).PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
53.
Mazzaferro V, Regalia E, Doci R, et al. Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:693–700.PubMedCrossRef
54.
55.
Ramalho M, Matos AP, AlObaidy M, Velloni F, Altun E, Semelka RC. Magnetic resonance imaging of the cirrhotic liver: diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and evaluation of response to treatment—part 2. Radiol Bras. 2017;50:115–125.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
56.
Jha RC, Mitchell DG, Weinreb JC, et al. LI-RADS categorization of benign and likely benign findings in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma: a pictorial atlas. Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203:W48–W69.CrossRef
57.
Tang A, Cruite I, Mitchell DG, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma imaging systems: why they exist, how they evolved, and how they differ. Abdom Radiol. 2018;43:3–12.CrossRef
58.
Bret PM, Labadie M, Bretagnolle M, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnosis by percutaneous fine needle biopsy. Gastrointest Radiol. 1988;13:253–255.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Giorgio A, Tarantino L, de Stefano G, et al. Complications after interventional sonography of focal liver lesions: a 22-year single-center experience. J Ultrasound Med. 2003;22:193–205.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Caturelli E, Solmi L, Anti M, et al. Ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy of early hepatocellular carcinoma complicating liver cirrhosis: a multicentre study. Gut. 2004;53:1356–1362.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
61.
Scholmerich J, Schacherer D. Diagnostic biopsy for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: useful, necessary, dangerous, or academic sport? Gut. 2004;53:1224–1226.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
62.
Forner A, Vilana R, Ayuso C, et al. Diagnosis of hepatic nodules 20 mm or smaller in cirrhosis: prospective validation of the noninvasive diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2008;47:97–104.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Durand F, Regimbeau JM, Belghiti J, et al. Assessment of the benefits and risks of percutaneous biopsy before surgical resection of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2001;35:254–258.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Takamori R, Wong LL, Dang C, et al. Needle-tract implantation from hepatocellular cancer: is needle biopsy of the liver always necessary? Liver Transpl. 2000;6:67–72.PubMed
65.
Silva MA, Hegab B, Hyde C, et al. Needle track seeding following biopsy of liver lesions in the diagnosis of hepatocellular cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut. 2008;57:1592–1596.PubMedCrossRef
66.
Stigliano R, Marelli L, Yu D, et al. Seeding following percutaneous diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for hepatocellular carcinoma. What is the risk and the outcome? Seeding risk for percutaneous approach of HCC. Cancer Treat Rev. 2007;33:437–447.PubMedCrossRef
67.
68.
Liu W, Qin J, Guo R, et al. Accuracy of the diagnostic evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma with LI-RADS. Acta Radiol. 2018;59:140–146.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Mitchell DG, Bashir MR, Sirlin CG. Management implications and outcomes of LI-RADS-2, -3, -4 and -M lesions. Abdom Radiol. 2018;43:143–148.CrossRef
70.
Mitchell DG, Bruix J, Sherman M, Sirlin CB. LI-RADS (liver imaging reporting and data system): Summary, discussion, and consensus of the LI-RADS management working group and future directions. Hepatology. 2015;61:1056–1065.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Llovet JM, Bruix J. Systematic review of randomized trials for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: chemoembolization improves survival. Hepatology. 2003;37:429–442.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Roth CG, Mitchell DG. Hepatocellular carcinoma and other hepatic malignancies: MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2014;52:683–707.PubMedCrossRef
73.
Younossi ZM, Stepanova M, Afendy M, et al. Changes in the prevalence of the most common causes of chronic liver diseases in the united states from 1988 to 2008. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9:e1.CrossRef
74.
Chen J, Yin M, Glaser KJ, Talwalkar JA, Ehman RL. MR elastography of liver disease: state of the art. Appl Radiol. 2013;42:5–12.PubMedPubMedCentral
75.
Venkatesh SK, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2014;22:433–446.PubMedCrossRef
76.
Bedossa P, Dargère D, Paradis V. Sampling variability of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2003;38:1449–1457.PubMedCrossRef
77.
Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ, et al. Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2614–2618.PubMedCrossRef
78.
West J, Card TR. Reduced mortality rates following elective percutaneous liver biopsies. Gastroenterology. 2010;139:1230–1237.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Takahashi N, Glockner JF, Talwalkar JA, Ehman RL. Non-invasive detection of liver fibrosis: MR imaging features vs MR elastography. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40:766–775.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
80.
Yin M, Talwalkar JA, Glaser KJ, et al. Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:e2.CrossRef
81.
Chalasani N, Younossi Z, Lavine JE, et al. The diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Practice guideline by the American association for the study of liver diseases, American college of gastroenterology, and the American gastroenterological association. Hepatology. 2012;55:2005–2023.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Charlton MR, Burns JM, Pedersen RA, Watt KD, Heimbach JK, Dierkhising RA. Frequency and outcomes of liver transplantation for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in the united states. Gastroenterology. 2011;141:1249–1253.PubMedCrossRef
83.
Starley BQ, Calcagno CJ, Harrison SA. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma: a weighty connection. Hepatology. 2010;51:1820–1832.PubMedCrossRef
84.
85.
86.
Reeder SB, Cruite I, Hamilton G, Sirlin CB. Quantitative assessment of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34:729–749.PubMedCrossRef
87.
Idilman IS, Aniktar H, Idilman R, et al. Hepatic steatosis: quantification by proton density fat fraction with MR imaging versus liver biopsy. Radiology. 2013;267:767–775.PubMedCrossRef
88.
89.
90.
91.
Varghese J, Farrell M, Courtney G, Osborne H, Murray F, Lee M. A prospective comparison of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the evaluation of patients with suspected biliary tract disease. Clin Radiol. 1999;54:513–520.PubMedCrossRef
92.
93.
Boraschi P, Neri E, Braccini G, et al. Choledocolithiasis: diagnostic accuracy of MR cholangiopancreatography. Three-year experience. Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;17:1245–1253.PubMedCrossRef
94.
Coakley FV, Schwartz LH. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;9:157–162.PubMedCrossRef
95.
Margulis AR, Fisher MR. Present clinical status of magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1985;2:309–327.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Chezmar JL, Nelson RC, Small WC, Bernardino ME. Magnetic resonance imaging of the pancreas with gadolinium-DTPA. Abdom Imaging. 1991;16:139–142.
97.
98.
Miller FH, Rini NJ, Keppke AL. MRI of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:W365–W374.CrossRef
99.
Ichikawa T, Sou H, Araki T, et al. Duct-penetrating sign at MRCP: Usefulness for differentiating inflammatory pancreatic mass from pancreatic carcinomas. Radiology. 2001;221:107–116.PubMedCrossRef
100.
101.
Cho SG, Lee DH, Lee KY, et al. Differentiation of chronic focal pancreatitis from pancreatic carcinoma by in vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005;29:163–169.PubMedCrossRef
102.
103.
Fidler JL, Guimaraes L, Einstein DM. MR imaging of the small bowel. Radiographics. 2009;29:1811–1825.PubMedCrossRef
104.
105.
106.
Gandhi SN, Brown MA, Wong JG, Aguirre DA, Sirlin CB. MR contrast agents for liver imaging: what, when, how. Radiographics. 2006;26:1621–1636.PubMedCrossRef
107.
Wnorowski AM, Guglielmo FF, Mitchell DG. How to perform and interpret cine MR enterography. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42:1180–1189.PubMedCrossRef
108.
Grand DJ, Guglielmo FF, Al-Hawary MM. MR enterography in Crohn’s disease: Current consensus on optimal imaging technique and future advances from the SAR crohn’s disease-focused panel. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40:953–964.PubMedCrossRef
109.
Lee SS, Kim AY, Yang S, et al. Crohn disease of the small bowel: comparison of CT enterography, MR enterography, and small-bowel follow-through as diagnostic techniques. Radiology. 2009;251:751–761.PubMedCrossRef
110.
Samuel S, Bruining DH, Loftus EV, et al. Endoscopic skipping of the distal terminal ileum in crohn’s disease can lead to negative results from ileocolonoscopy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;10:1253–1259.PubMedCrossRef
111.
Fletcher JG, Fidler JL, Bruining DH, Huprich JE. New concepts in intestinal imaging for inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology. 2011;140:e7.CrossRef
112.
Siddiki HA, Fidler JL, Fletcher JG, et al. Prospective comparison of state-of-the-art MR enterography and CT enterography in small-bowel crohn’s disease. Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:113–121.CrossRef
113.
Bruining DH, Siddiki HA, Fletcher JG, Tremaine WJ, Sandborn WJ, Loftus EV. Prevalence of penetrating disease and extraintestinal manifestations of crohn’s disease detected with CT enterography. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2008;14:1701–1706.PubMedCrossRef
114.
Taylor FG, Swift RI, Blomqvist L, Brown G. A systematic approach to the interpretation of preoperative staging MRI for rectal cancer. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:1827–1835.CrossRef
115.
Patel UB, Taylor F, Blomqvist L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging–detected tumor response for locally advanced rectal cancer predicts survival outcomes: MERCURY experience. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3753–3760.PubMedCrossRef
116.
de Miguel Criado J, del Salto LG, Rivas PF, et al. MR imaging evaluation of perianal fistulas: spectrum of imaging features. Radiographics. 2011;32:175–194.
117.
Morris J, Spencer JA, Ambrose NS. MR imaging classification of perianal fistulas and its implications for patient management. Radiographics. 2000;20:623–635.PubMedCrossRef
118.
119.
Pedrosa I, Lafornara M, Pandharipande PV, Goldsmith JD, Rofsky NM. Pregnant patients suspected of having acute appendicitis: effect of MR imaging on negative laparotomy rate and appendiceal perforation rate. Radiology. 2009;250:749–757.PubMedCrossRef
120.
Pedrosa I, Levine D, Eyvazzadeh AD, Siewert B, Ngo L, Rofsky NM. MR imaging evaluation of acute appendicitis in pregnancy. Radiology. 2006;238:891–899.PubMedCrossRef
121.
Abrigo JM, Shen J, Wong VW, et al. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: spectral patterns observed from an in vivo phosphorus magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. J Hepatol. 2014;60:809–815.PubMedCrossRef
122.
Traussnigg S, Kienbacher C, Gajdošík M, et al. P1045: ultra-high-field MR-spectroscopy in NAFLD as non-invasive in-vivo tool for monitoring changes in fat and energy metabolism with potential identification of NASH and advanced fibrosis by saturation transfer technique. J Hepatol. 2015;62:S739–S740.CrossRef
123.
Dezortova M, Taimr P, Skoch A, Spicak J, Hajek M. Etiology and functional status of liver cirrhosis by 31P MR spectroscopy. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:6926–6931.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
124.
Purvis LA, Clarke WT, Valkovič L, et al. Phosphodiester content measured in human liver by in vivo 31P MR spectroscopy at 7 tesla. Magn Reson Med. 2017;78:2095–2105.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Contributions of Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Gastroenterological Practice: MRIs for GIs
verfasst von
Christopher G. Roth
Dina Halegoua-De Marzio
Flavius F. Guglielmo
Publikationsdatum
16.03.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Ausgabe 5/2018
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-018-4991-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2018

Digestive Diseases and Sciences 5/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Original Article

Tacrolimus and Mycophenolate Mofetil as Second-Line Therapies for Pediatric Patients with Autoimmune Hepatitis

Original Article

Fecal Fatty Acid Profiling as a Potential New Screening Biomarker in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Editorial

Rebamipide in Functional and Organic Dyspepsia: Sometimes the Best Offense Is a Good Defense

Original Article

Persistence of Circulating Hepatitis C Virus Antigens-Specific Immune Complexes in Patients with Resolved HCV Infection

Original Article

Comparative Effectiveness of Infliximab Versus Adalimumab in Patients with Biologic-Naïve Crohn’s Disease

Concise commentary

Concise Commentary: Gluten-Free Diets—You’ve Gotta Believe in Something

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

26.04.2024 | Hüft-TEP | Nachrichten

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

25.04.2024 | Hypotonie | Nachrichten

Niedriger diastolischer Blutdruck erhöht Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen

25.04.2024 | Hypertonie | Nachrichten

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

25.04.2024 | Parkinson-Krankheit | Nachrichten

Viel Bewegung in der Parkinsonforschung
weitere anzeigen

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise