Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques that enhance the visualization of mineralized tissues (hereafter referred to as MT-MRI) are increasingly being incorporated into clinical practice, particularly in musculoskeletal imaging. These techniques aim to mimic the contrast provided by computed tomography (CT), while taking advantage of MRI's superior soft tissue contrast and lack of ionizing radiation. However, the variety of MT-MRI techniques, including three-dimensional gradient-echo, ultra-short and zero-echo time, susceptibility-weighted imaging, and artificial intelligence-generated synthetic CT, each offer different technical characteristics, advantages, and limitations. Understanding these differences is critical to optimizing clinical application. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the most commonly used MT-MRI techniques, categorizing them based on their technical principles and clinical utility. The advantages and disadvantages of each approach, including their performance in bone morphology assessment, fracture detection, arthropathy-related findings, and soft tissue calcification evaluation are discussed. Additionally, technical limitations and artifacts that may affect image quality and diagnostic accuracy, such as susceptibility effects, signal-to-noise ratio issues, and motion artifacts are addressed. Despite promising developments, MT-MRI remains inferior to conventional CT for evaluating subtle bone abnormalities and soft tissue calcification due to spatial resolution limitations. However, advances in deep learning and hardware innovations, such as artificial intelligence-generated synthetic CT and ultrahigh-field MRI, may bridge this gap in the future.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2024.11.001 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!