|
|
||||||||
EDUCATION EXHIBIT |
1 From the Department of Radiology, Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Medical Center Blvd, Winston-Salem, NC 27157 (J.R.L.); and the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (V.G., J.J.B.). Presented as an education exhibit at the 2003 RSNA scientific assembly. Received March 12, 2004; revision requested April 1 and received May 11; accepted May 12. All authors have no financial relationships to disclose. Address correspondence to J.R.L. (e-mail: jleyende@wfubmc.edu).
Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging provides multiplanar large field-of-view images of the body with excellent soft-tissue contrast and without ionizing radiation. As a result, MR imaging is increasingly being used to image the maternal abdomen and pelvis during and immediately after pregnancy. Results of rapid T1- and T2-weighted imaging are often diagnostic, and blood vessels, ductal structures, and the urinary tract can frequently be visualized without intravenous administration of contrast material. Until more conclusive safety data become available, MR imaging should be reserved for cases in which results of ultrasonography are inconclusive and patient care depends on further imaging. In the setting of acute abdomen during pregnancy, MR imaging allows identification of areas of inflammation, abscess formation, hemorrhage, and bowel obstruction. MR imaging also helps determine the organ of origin, extent, and composition of maternal neoplasms and is useful in evaluation of müllerian duct anomalies and abnormalities of placental formation, position, and implantation. Many postpartum complications such as retained products of conception and uterine dehiscence may be diagnosed with MR imaging when results of other modalities are indeterminate.
© RSNA, 2004
Index Terms: Placenta, abnormalities, 857.824 Pregnancy, abnormalities, 85.82 Pregnancy, complications, 85.82 Pregnancy, MR, 85.1214
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. S. Lee, N. M. Rofsky, and I. Pedrosa Localization of the Appendix at MR Imaging during Pregnancy: Utility of the Cecal Tilt Angle Radiology, August 18, 2008; (2008) 2483080066. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
T. A. Jaffe, C. M. Miller, and E. M. Merkle Practice Patterns in Imaging of the Pregnant Patient with Abdominal Pain: A Survey of Academic Centers Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2007; 189(5): 1128 - 1134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. S. Katz, V. Merunka, J. J. Hines, E. M. Meiner, I. Pedrosa, D. Levine, and N. M. Rofsky Invited Commentary * Authors' Response RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 743 - 753. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Oto, P. N. Srinivasan, R. D. Ernst, M. Koroglu, F. Cesani, T. Nishino, and G. Chaljub Revisiting MRI for appendix location during pregnancy. Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2006; 186(3): 883 - 887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J A Spencer A multidisciplinary approach to ovarian cancer at diagnosis Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2005; 78(Special_Issue_2): S94 - S102. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOGRAPHICS | RADIOLOGY | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |