Meckel腔影像学检查方法比较.docVIP

Meckel腔影像学检查方法比较 目录 TOC \o 1-9 \h \z \u 目录 1 正文 1 文1：Meckel腔影像学检查方法比较 1 1 资料与方法 3 2 结果 4 3 讨论 5 文2：乳腺癌影像学检查方法比较及进展 8 1 乳腺钼靶X线摄影 8 2 超声成像 9 3 CT检查 10 4 MRI扫描 11 5 核素显像 12 6 小结与展望 12 参考文摘引言： 13 原创性声明（模板） 14 文章致谢（模板） 14 正文 Meckel腔影像学检查方法比较 文1：Meckel腔影像学检查方法比较 ［ABSTRACT］ObjectiveTo study the optimized method and sequence of CT and MRI on detecting the normal Meckel cave （MC）. MethodsSixty people with normal MC were equally divided into three groups: Group Ⅰ， SE T1 WI， GRE T1 WI， and FSE T2 WI were performed; group Ⅱ， SE T1 WI-C+ ， FR FSE T2 WI， and 3D FSE T2 WI were performed; and group Ⅲ CT and CT-C+were performed. The efficacy of the different methods mentioned above were compared in terms of the detection of the anat-omy of MC and the artifacts produced. Results Dural walls: GRE T1 WI， 3D FSE T2 WI， and CT were inferior to other five methods in the detection of lateral wall （ H=， P ）;SE T1 WI， FSE T2 WI， FR FSE T2 WI， and SE T1 WI-C+were su-perior to other methods in the detection of inner wall，superior wall， anterior wall， inferior wall， and posterior wall （ H=， P ）. SE T1 WI， FSE T2 WI， FR FSE T2 WI， and SE T1 WI-C+were superior to other methods in detection of tri-geminal ganglion （ H=，P ）. SE T1 WI-C+was superior to other methods in detection of perineural venous plexus of trigeminal ganglion （ H=，P ）. FSE T2 WI and FR FSE T2 WI were superior to the other six methods in detection of nerve fibe （ H=，P ）. SE T1 WI， FSE T2 WI， FR FSE T2 WI， and SE T1 WI-C+were superior to the other four methods in detection of trigeminal cistern （H=，P ）. Magnetic susceptibility artifact in GRE T1 WI and 3D FSE T2 WI were more than that of the other methods （ H=，P ）. There was bone artifact on CT examination. There were no difference between tooth artifact and moving artifact on CT and MRI examination. ConclusioE T1 WI and FSE T2 WI are the optimal methods for detection of MC;FR FSE T2 WI and SE T1 WI-C+can be used as supplement when nec