Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 79

1.

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla: Is administration of hyoscine-N-butyl-bromide mandatory?

Roethke MC, Kuru TH, Radbruch A, Hadaschik B, Schlemmer HP.

World J Radiol. 2013 Jul 28;5(7):259-63. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v5.i7.259.

2.

Hyoscine butylbromide significantly decreases motion artefacts and allows better delineation of anatomic structures in mp-MRI of the prostate.

Ullrich T, Quentin M, Schmaltz AK, Arsov C, Rubbert C, Blondin D, Rabenalt R, Albers P, Antoch G, Schimmöller L.

Eur Radiol. 2018 Jan;28(1):17-23. doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-4940-7. Epub 2017 Jul 7.

PMID:
28687912
3.

Effect of butylscopolamine on image quality in MRI of the prostate.

Wagner M, Rief M, Busch J, Scheurig C, Taupitz M, Hamm B, Franiel T.

Clin Radiol. 2010 Jun;65(6):460-4. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2010.02.007.

PMID:
20451013
4.

Effect of hyoscine butylbromide on prostate multiparametric MRI anatomical and functional image quality.

Slough RA, Caglic I, Hansen NL, Patterson AJ, Barrett T.

Clin Radiol. 2018 Feb;73(2):216.e9-216.e14. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.07.013. Epub 2017 Aug 10.

PMID:
28803622
5.

The value of hyoscine butylbromide in pelvic MRI.

Johnson W, Taylor MB, Carrington BM, Bonington SC, Swindell R.

Clin Radiol. 2007 Nov;62(11):1087-93. Epub 2007 Aug 20.

PMID:
17920868
6.

MR imaging of the prostate at 3 Tesla: comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 Tesla.

Sosna J, Pedrosa I, Dewolf WC, Mahallati H, Lenkinski RE, Rofsky NM.

Acad Radiol. 2004 Aug;11(8):857-62.

PMID:
15354305
7.

[MRI of prostate cancer using three different coil systems: image quality, tumor detection, and staging].

Beyersdorff D, Darsow U, Stephan C, Schnorr D, Loening S, Taupitz M.

Rofo. 2003 Jun;175(6):799-805. German.

PMID:
12811693
8.

Diffusion-weighted imaging in the assessment of prostate cancer: Comparison of zoomed imaging and conventional technique.

Brendle C, Martirosian P, Schwenzer NF, Kaufmann S, Kruck S, Kramer U, Notohamiprodjo M, Nikolaou K, Schraml C.

Eur J Radiol. 2016 May;85(5):893-900. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.02.020. Epub 2016 Feb 27.

PMID:
27130048
9.

MRI of prostate cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T: comparison of image quality in tumor detection and staging.

Beyersdorff D, Taymoorian K, Knösel T, Schnorr D, Felix R, Hamm B, Bruhn H.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Nov;185(5):1214-20.

PMID:
16247137
10.

Effect of hyoscine butyl-bromide on the duration of active phase of labor: A randomized-controlled trial.

Imaralu JO, Kuti O, Badejoko OO, Loto OM, Olaleye A.

Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Dec;56(6):725-730. doi: 10.1016/j.tjog.2017.10.003.

11.

Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer.

Shah ZK, Elias SN, Abaza R, Zynger DL, DeRenne LA, Knopp MV, Guo B, Schurr R, Heymsfield SB, Jia G.

Acad Radiol. 2015 Apr;22(4):467-74. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.11.007. Epub 2015 Jan 8.

12.

Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and Likert scales.

Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Lim RP, Hindman N, Deng FM, Babb JS, Taneja SS.

Radiology. 2013 Nov;269(2):482-92. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13122233. Epub 2013 Jun 20.

PMID:
23788719
13.

3 Tesla multiparametric MRI for GTV-definition of Dominant Intraprostatic Lesions in patients with Prostate Cancer--an interobserver variability study.

Rischke HC, Nestle U, Fechter T, Doll C, Volegova-Neher N, Henne K, Scholber J, Knippen S, Kirste S, Grosu AL, Jilg CA.

Radiat Oncol. 2013 Jul 22;8:183. doi: 10.1186/1748-717X-8-183.

14.

High-resolution T2-weighted abdominal magnetic resonance imaging using respiratory triggering: impact of butylscopolamine on image quality.

Wagner M, Klessen C, Rief M, Elgeti T, Taupitz M, Hamm B, Asbach P.

Acta Radiol. 2008 May;49(4):376-82. doi: 10.1080/02841850801894806.

PMID:
18415778
15.

Comparison of interreader reproducibility of the prostate imaging reporting and data system and likert scales for evaluation of multiparametric prostate MRI.

Rosenkrantz AB, Lim RP, Haghighi M, Somberg MB, Babb JS, Taneja SS.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Oct;201(4):W612-8. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.10173.

PMID:
24059400
16.

Comparison of pelvic phased-array versus endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla for local staging of prostate cancer.

Kim BS, Kim TH, Kwon TG, Yoo ES.

Yonsei Med J. 2012 May;53(3):550-6. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2012.53.3.550.

17.

Comparison of comfort and image quality with two endorectal coils in MRI of the prostate.

Powell DK, Kodsi KL, Levin G, Yim A, Nicholson D, Kagen AC.

J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Feb;39(2):419-26. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24179. Epub 2013 May 16.

PMID:
23682041
18.

Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T--comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance.

Heijmink SW, Fütterer JJ, Hambrock T, Takahashi S, Scheenen TW, Huisman HJ, Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa CA, Knipscheer BC, Kiemeney LA, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO.

Radiology. 2007 Jul;244(1):184-95. Epub 2007 May 10.

PMID:
17495178
19.

Magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer: comparison of image quality using endorectal and pelvic phased array coils.

Husband JE, Padhani AR, MacVicar AD, Revell P.

Clin Radiol. 1998 Sep;53(9):673-81.

PMID:
9766721
20.

Does a cleansing enema improve image quality of 3T surface coil multiparametric prostate MRI?

Lim C, Quon J, McInnes M, Shabana WM, El-Khodary M, Schieda N.

J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Sep;42(3):689-97. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24833. Epub 2014 Dec 30.

PMID:
25556957

Supplemental Content

Support Center