2023
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09939-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of glenoid bone loss and other osseous shoulder pathologies comparing MR-based CT-like images with conventional CT

Abstract: Objectives To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of CT-like images based on a 3D T1-weighted spoiled gradient-echo sequence (T1 GRE), an ultra-short echo time sequence (UTE), and a 3D T1-weighted spoiled multi-echo gradient-echo sequence (FRACTURE) with conventional CT in patients with suspected osseous shoulder pathologies. Materials and methods Patients with suspected traumatic dislocation of the shoulder (n = 46, mean age 40 ± 14.5 years, 1… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 32 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although utilization of 2 different modalities (MRI in patients with C1 shoulders and CT in control patients to measure osseous shoulder girdle anatomy) may seem to alter the comparability of our results, 3D-MRIs are described in the literature as reliable and as accurate as conventional CT in the diagnosis and evaluation of osseous pathologies of the shoulder girdle. 7 , 27 , 28 , 30 The small sample size of the C1 group may underpower our results. Nonetheless, the differences were substantial enough to reach statistical significance even with a small sample size.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Although utilization of 2 different modalities (MRI in patients with C1 shoulders and CT in control patients to measure osseous shoulder girdle anatomy) may seem to alter the comparability of our results, 3D-MRIs are described in the literature as reliable and as accurate as conventional CT in the diagnosis and evaluation of osseous pathologies of the shoulder girdle. 7 , 27 , 28 , 30 The small sample size of the C1 group may underpower our results. Nonetheless, the differences were substantial enough to reach statistical significance even with a small sample size.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%