JUM Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jain, K. A.
Right arrow Articles by Jeffrey, R. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jain, K. A.
Right arrow Articles by Jeffrey, R. B., Jr

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, Vol 13, Issue 11 845-853, Copyright © 1994 by American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Evaluation of pelvic masses with magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography

K. A. Jain and R. B. Jeffrey Jr
Department of Radiology, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacaramento 95817.

Magnetic resonance imaging is becoming increasingly useful in characterizing adnexal masses, whereas endovaginal ultrasound is an invaluable technique for examining the uterus and adnexa. This pictorial essay depicts the internal architectural details necessary for characterization of various adnexal masses imaged with both EVU and MR imaging. Forty consecutive examinations that revealed 51 adnexal masses were reviewed. All patients had MR imaging and EVU examinations within 1 week of each other. T1- and T2-weighted images in coronal, axial, and sagittal planes were included. Fat suppression technique also was used in selected cases. EVU, because of its high spatial resolution, was able to depict better internal architectural details, allowing specific diagnosis of most adnexal masses, whereas MR imaging was superior in differentiating hemorrhagic masses from dermoids when specific fat suppression techniques were used.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Adusumilli, H. K. Hussain, E. M. Caoili, W. J. Weadock, J. P. Murray, T. D. Johnson, Q. Chen, and B. Desjardins
MRI of sonographically indeterminate adnexal masses.
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2006; 187(3): 732 - 740.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
S. Fenchel, D. Grab, K. Nuessle, J. Kotzerke, A. Rieber, R. Kreienberg, H.-J. Brambs, and S. N. Reske
Asymptomatic Adnexal Masses: Correlation of FDG PET and Histopathologic Findings
Radiology, June 1, 2002; 223(3): 780 - 788.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
Y.-Y. Jeong, E. K. Outwater, and H. K. Kang
Imaging Evaluation of Ovarian Masses
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2000; 20(5): 1445 - 1470.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
C. M. C. Tempany, K. H. Zou, S. G. Silverman, D. L. Brown, A. B. Kurtz, and B. J. McNeil
Staging of Advanced Ovarian Cancer: Comparison of Imaging Modalities-Report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group
Radiology, June 1, 2000; 215(3): 761 - 767.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
A. B. Kurtz, J. V. Tsimikas, C. M. C. Tempany, U. M. Hamper, P. H. Arger, R. L. Bree, R. J. Wechsler, I. R. Francis, J. E. Kuhlman, E. S. Siegelman, et al.
Diagnosis and Staging of Ovarian Cancer: Comparative Values of Doppler and Conventional US, CT, and MR Imaging Correlated with Surgery and Histopathologic Analysis—Report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group
Radiology, July 1, 1999; 212(1): 19 - 27.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.