戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1       We visualized the BF using T2-weighted FLAIR images.
2 segmentation with the combination of T1 + T2-FLAIR images.
3 weighted spin-echo images and in 20 cases on FLAIR images.
4 ngeal metastases were detected by using only FLAIR images.
5 T1-weighted images than on postcontrast fast FLAIR images.
6 images and can be seen only on 2-mm sagittal FLAIR images.
7 ages and from 0.76 to 0.92 for the generated FLAIR images.
8 nd other areas better with postcontrast fast FLAIR imaging.
9 typically better seen with postcontrast fast FLAIR imaging.
10 ft and right hippocampi was smallest at fast FLAIR imaging.
11 tropic-resolution (0.55 x 0.55 x 0.55 mm(3)) FLAIR* images.
12 ased on fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR) imaging.
13 nd fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR) imaging.
14 ratentorially (P = .05) but were similar for FLAIR imaging (0.90 +/- 0.06) and T2-weighted MR imaging
15 ed A(1) scores were significantly better for FLAIR imaging (0.96 +/- 0.01 [standard error]) than for
16 ctively, when replacing both T1-weighted and FLAIR images; 0.84, 0.74, and 0.97 when replacing only t
17 higher on EPI-FLAIR images in all lobes (EPI-FLAIR images: 1.6-2.1; T2-weighted SSFSE images:1.2-1.2;
18 and location were equally represented on the FLAIR images (11 000/100-200/2600 [repetition time msec/
19 ysis of the DEFUSE 2 study, 35 patients with FLAIR images acquired both after endovascular therapy (m
20 received consecutive contrasted 3D isotropic FLAIR imaging after gadobutrol administration showed tha
21 lity T2-fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images alone is fast and reliable.
22 rater reliability (kappa = 0.91-0.95 for EPI-FLAIR images and 0.80-0.87 for T2-weighted SSFSE images)
23 - 0.02, and 0.89 +/- 0.04, respectively, for FLAIR imaging and 0.77 +/- 0.06, 0.99 +/- 0.01, and 0.89
24  of chronic seizures warrants T2-weighted or FLAIR imaging and gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted imagin
25 stic on fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images and converted into a white matter decay sc
26 images, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images, and T2-weighted images.
27 g (EPI) fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images, and to quantify differences in the depict
28 0.84, 0.74, and 0.97 when replacing only the FLAIR images; and 0.97, 0.95, and 0.92 when replacing on
29 rmance in the detection of MS lesions on the FLAIR images, as estimated by using areas under the alte
30 eighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images at disease onset and during follow-up.
31 apy have significantly less lesion growth on FLAIR images between after therapy and day 5 compared wi
32 ce (MR) fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images between the images after endovascular ther
33 only produced higher SNR for T1-weighted and FLAIR images but also higher CNRs for all three sequence
34 te SAH cases were interpreted as abnormal on FLAIR images by both readers.
35               Purpose To reduce artifacts on FLAIR images by using an optimized inversion pulse that
36       An artificially hyperintense signal on FLAIR images can result from magnetic susceptibility art
37 eighted fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) image data in The Cancer Image Archive (TCIA).
38 eighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) imaging (Fig 4), and susceptibility-weighted imag
39 -enhanced T1-weighted images are better than FLAIR images for detecting leptomeningeal metastases.
40  and signal intensity were assessed by using FLAIR imaging for the initial lesion (ie, visible after
41 ges from postcontrast T1-weighted images and FLAIR images from T2-weighted images.
42                                              FLAIR imaging has a sensitivity of 34% for cytologically
43                                         Fast FLAIR images have noticeable T1 contrast making gadolini
44 nd subplate were significantly higher on EPI-FLAIR images in all lobes (EPI-FLAIR images: 1.6-2.1; T2
45                    Observers did better with FLAIR imaging in the detection of cortical lesions, and
46 ed, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images in 189 patients (101 women, 88 men; mean a
47                                  Findings on FLAIR* images included intralesional veins for lesions l
48                   However, postcontrast fast FLAIR images may be useful for detecting superficial abn
49   T2 measurements obtained at dual-echo fast FLAIR imaging may help detect subtle hippocampal abnorma
50 ent using high-resolution 3D isotropic CE-T2-FLAIR imaging noninvasively; this technique may serve as
51                    High-isotropic-resolution FLAIR* images obtained at 3.0 T yield high contrast for
52                                 High-quality FLAIR* images of the brain were produced at 3.0 T, yield
53 igher for FLAIR* images than for T2-weighted FLAIR images (P < .0001).
54                                         Fast FLAIR imaging provided the smallest normal range and SD
55  0.013, and the median MSE for the generated FLAIR images ranged from 0.004 to 0.103.
56 ent in 14 studies, whereas postcontrast fast FLAIR images showed superior enhancement in 15 studies.
57 lesions that are hyperintense on precontrast FLAIR images, such as intraparenchymal tumors, may be be
58 upratentorially, performance was better with FLAIR imaging than with T2-weighted MR imaging.
59 ein CNR values were significantly higher for FLAIR* images than for T2-weighted FLAIR images (P < .00
60 er, the T2-weighted, FIESTA, and T2-weighted FLAIR images that used the CSF cleft sign to predict adh
61 ed with fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) imaging; the use of intravenously administered co
62 ttributing increased CSF signal intensity on FLAIR images to abnormal CSF properties such as hemorrha
63                              The accuracy of FLAIR images was 97% versus 91% for SE images (P<.02).
64               Subplate identification on EPI-FLAIR images was superior to that on T2-weighted SSFSE i
65 mm fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR) imaging was added to the routine MR studies of th
66 hree-dimensional (3D) magnetization prepared FLAIR images were acquired in 12 volunteers (0.8 3 0.8 3
67                                              FLAIR images were evaluated for the severity of the dise
68                                              FLAIR images were interpreted blindly and independently
69 imulated in which the T1-weighted images and FLAIR images were missing.
70 nd March 2018 with T2-weighted SSFSE and EPI-FLAIR images were reviewed.
71 he sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FLAIR imaging were 86%, 91%, and 89%; the sensitivity, s
72 FLAIR and FLAIR with controlled inversion (C-FLAIR) images were acquired at 3 T in a phantom designed
73 eighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) imaging were reviewed to identify the presence of
74 ed, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery [FLAIR] images) were curated.
75 ts, a healthy volunteer underwent sequential FLAIR imaging while breathing high-flow 100% O2.
76         Measurements were performed on axial FLAIR images with section thickness of less than 5 mm.
77 2 fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (CE-T2-FLAIR) imaging with a 3T magnetic resonance machine to s