Top

European Radiology

Published in:

01-12-2011 | Musculoskeletal

Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy

Authors: Hui-Lin Yang, Tao Liu, Xi-Ming Wang, Yong Xu, Sheng-Ming Deng

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 12/2011

Abstract

Objective

To perform a meta-analysis to compare ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy (BS) for the diagnosis of bone metastases.

Methods

Databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for relevant original articles published from January 1995 to January 2010. Software was used to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity and summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROC).

Results

67 articles consisting of 145 studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria. On per-patient basis, the pooled sensitivity estimates for PET, CT, MRI and BS were 89.7%, 72.9%, 90.6% and 86.0% respectively. PET=MRI>BS>CT. (“=”indicated no significant difference, P > 0.05; “>” indicated significantly higher, P < 0.05). The pooled specificity estimates for PET, CT, MRI and BS were 96.8%, 94.8%, 95.4% and 81.4% respectively. PET = CT = MRI>BS. On per-lesion basis, the pooled sensitivity estimates for PET, CT, MRI and BS were 86.9%, 77.1%, 90.4% and 75.1% respectively. PET = MRI>BS>CT. The pooled specificity estimates for PET, CT, MRI and BS were 97.0%, 83.2%, 96.0% and 93.6% respectively. PET>MRI>BS>CT.

Conclusion

PET and MRI were found to be comparable and both significantly more accurate than CT and BS for the diagnosis of bone metastases.

Even-Sapir E (2005) Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med 46:1356–1367PubMed

Padhani A, Husband J (1998) Bone metastases. In: Husband JES, Reznek RH (eds) Imaging in oncology. Isis Medical Media Ltd, Oxford, pp 765–787

Rubens RD (1998) Bone metastases: the clinical problem. Eur J Cancer 34:210–213PubMedCrossRef

Rybak LD, Rosenthal DI (2001) Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases. Q J Nucl Med 45:53–64PubMed

Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA et al (2004) Ueno NT. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:2942–2953PubMedCrossRef

Roodman GD (2001) Biology of osteoclast activation in cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:3562–3571PubMed

Van Houwelingen HC, Zwinderman KH, Stijnen T (1993) A bivariate approach to meta-analysis. Stat Med 12:2273–2284PubMedCrossRef

Van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T (2002) Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med 21:589–624PubMedCrossRef

Deville WL, Bezemer PD, Bouter LM (2000) Publications on diagnostic test evaluation in family medicine journals: an optimal search strategy. J Clin Epidemiol 53:65–69PubMedCrossRef

10.

Berlin JA (1997) Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group. Lancet 350:185–186PubMedCrossRef

11.

Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB et al (2003) The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Meth 3:25CrossRef

12.

Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B (1993) Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 12:1293–1316PubMed

13.

Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A et al (2006) Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Meth 6:31CrossRef

14.

Eustace S, Tello R, Carey J et al (1997) A comparison of whole-body turbostir MR imaging and planar 99 m Tc-Methylene Diphosphonate Scintigraphy in the examination of patients with suspected skeletal metastasis. Am J Roentgenol 169:1655–1661

15.

Bury T, Barreto A, Daenen F et al (1998) Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the detection of bone metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 25:1244–1247PubMedCrossRef

16.

Gibril F, Doppman JL, Reynolds JC et al (1998) Bone metastases in patients with gastrinomas: a prospective study of bone scanning, somatostatin receptor scanning, and magnetic resonance image in their detection, frequency, location, and effect of their detection on management. J Clin Oncol 16:1040–1053PubMed

17.

Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Elsner K et al (1999) Sensitivity in detecting osseous lesions depends on anatomic localization: planar bone scintigraphy versus ¹⁸ F-PET. J Nucl Med 40:1623–1629PubMed

18.

Yip CH, Paramsothy M (1999) Value of routine ^99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy in the detection of occult skeletal metastases in women with primary breast cancer. Breast 8:267–269PubMedCrossRef

19.

Lebtahi R, Cadiot G, Delahaye N et al (1999) Detection of bone metastases in patients with endocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors: bone scintigraphy compared with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 40:1602–1608PubMed

20.

Moog F, Kotzerke J, Reske SN (1999) FDG PET can replace bone scintigraphy in primary staging of malignant lymphoma. J Nucl Med 40:1407–1413PubMed

21.

Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J et al (1999) Early detection and accurate description of extent of metastatic bone disease in breast cancer with fluoride ion and positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 17:2381–2389PubMed

22.

Earnest F, Ryu JH, Miller GM et al (1999) Suspected non-small cell lung cancer: incidence of occult brain and skeletal metastases and effectiveness of imaging for detection - pilot study. Radiology 211:137–145PubMed

23.

Layer G, Steudel A, Schuller H et al (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging to detect bone marrow metastases in the initial staging of small cell lung carcinoma and breast carcinoma. Cancer 85:1004–1009PubMedCrossRef

24.

Schirrmeister H, Glatting G, Hetzel J et al (2001) Prospective evaluation of the clinical value of planar bone scans, SPECT, and ¹⁸ F-Labeled NaF PET in newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Nucl Med 42:1800–1804PubMed

25.

Koga S, Tsuda S, Nishikido M et al (2001) The diagnostic value of bone scan in patents with renal cell carcinoma. J Urology 166:2126–2128CrossRef

26.

Altehoefer C, Ghanem N, Hogerle S et al (2001) Comparative detectability of bone metastases and impact on therapy of magnetic resonance imaging and bone scintigraphy in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 40:16–23PubMedCrossRef

27.

Ohta M, Tokuda Y, Suzuki Y et al (2001) Whole body PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: comparison with ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP bone scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun 22:875–879PubMedCrossRef

28.

Savelli G, Maffioli L, Maccauro M et al (2001) Bone scintigraphy and the added value of SPECT (single photon emission tomography) in detecting skeletal lesions. Q J Nucl Med 45:27–37PubMed

29.

Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Elsner K et al (2001) 2-(Fluorine-18)Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma: a bicenter trial. Cancer 91:889–899PubMedCrossRef

30.

Wu HC, Yen RF, Shen YY et al (2002) Comparing whole body 18 F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99 m methylene diphosphate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with renal cell carcinomas – a preliminary report. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 128:503–506PubMedCrossRef

31.

Ghanem N, Altehoefer C, Hogerle S et al (2002) Comparative diagnostic value and therapeutic relevance of magnetic resonance imaging and bone marrow scintigraphy in patients with metastatic solid tumors of the axial skeleton. Eur J Radiol 43:256–261PubMedCrossRef

32.

Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ et al (2002) Comparing whole body 18 F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99 m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 128:325–328PubMedCrossRef

33.

Hsia TC, Shen YY, Yen RF et al (2002) Comparing whole body 18 F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99 m methylene diphosphate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Neoplasma 49:267–271PubMed

34.

Prior JO, Barghouth G, Delaloye JF et al (2003) The value of bone marrow scintigraphy using 99mTc monoclonal antigranulocyte antibodies in complement to bone scintigraphy in detecting bone metastases from primary breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 24:29–36PubMedCrossRef

35.

Zhang C, Zhou Q, Chen YH et al (2003) Comparison of ¹⁸ F-FDG PET with ^99mTc-MDP bone scan in detection of bone metastases. Chin J Nucl Med 23:201–203

36.

Lee KH, Park JM, Yoon JK et al (2003) Bone scintigraphy of skeletal metastasis in hepatoma patients treated by TAE. Hepato-Gastroenterology 50:1983–1986PubMed

37.

Han LJ, Qu WY, He J et al (2003) Comparison of the clinical values of ¹⁸ F-FDG hPET/CT and ^99mTc-MDP bone scan in detection of bone metastases. Chin J Nucl Med 23:204–206

38.

Nakamoto YJ, Osman M, Wahl RL (2003) Prevalence and patterns of bone metastases detected with positron emission tomography using F-18 FDG. Clin Nucl Med 28:302–307PubMed

39.

Bossche BVD, Dhaeninck E, Winter FD et al (2004) ^99mTc depreotide scan compared with ^99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases and prediction of response to hormonal treatment in patients with breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 25:787–792CrossRef

40.

Schirrmeister H, Arslandemir C, Glatting G et al (2004) Omission of bone scanning according to staging guidelines leads to futile therapy in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 31:964–968CrossRef

41.

Cheran SK, Herndon JE 2nd, Patz EF Jr (2004) Comparison of whole-body FDG-PET to bone scan for detection of bone metastases in patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer. Lung Cancer 44:317–325PubMedCrossRef

42.

Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Wohlfart K et al (2004) Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14:99–105PubMedCrossRef

43.

Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU et al (2004) Whole-body MR imaging: evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology 233:139–148PubMedCrossRef

44.

Abe K, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y et al (2005) Comparison of ¹⁸FDG-PET with ^99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med 19:573–579PubMedCrossRef

45.

Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T et al (2005) Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 32:1253–1258CrossRef

46.

Kato H, Miyazaki T, Nakajima M et al (2005) Comparison between whole-body positron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy in evaluating bony metastases of esophageal carcinomas. Anticancer Res 25:4439–4444PubMed

47.

Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S et al (2004) Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1266–1273

48.

Fujimoto R, Higashi T, Nakamoto Y et al (2006) Diagnostic accuracy of bone metastases detection in cancer patients: Comparison between bone scintigraphy and whole-body FDG-PET. Ann Nucl Med 20:399–408PubMedCrossRef

49.

Gao Y, Fang J, Liu XY et al (2006) Diagnostic value of nuclide bone imaging for bone metastasis from lung cancer and clinic analysis. Chin J Lung Canc 9:357–361

50.

Groves AM, Beadsmoore CJ, Cheow HK et al (2006) Can 16-detector multislice CT exclude skeletal lesions during tumour staging? Implications for the cancer patient. Eur Radiol 16:1066–1073PubMedCrossRef

51.

Sadik M, Jakobsson D, Olofsson F et al (2006) A new computer-based decision-support system for the interpretation of bone scans. Nucl Med Commun 27:417–423PubMedCrossRef

52.

Liu FY, Chang JT, Wang HM et al (2006) [18 F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography is more sensitive than skeletal scintigraphy for detecting bone metastasis in endemic nasopharyngeal carcinoma at initial staging. J Clin Oncol 24:599–604PubMedCrossRef

53.

Sapir EE, Metser U, Mishani E et al (2006) The detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: ^99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, single- and Multi-Field-of-View SPECT, ¹⁸ F-Fluoride PET, and ¹⁸ F-Fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 47:287–297

54.

Aslan S, Cetin B, Akinci M et al (2006) Computed tomography in detecting bone metastases of breast carcinoma. Is it better than plain x-ray? Saudi Med J 27:1326–1328PubMed

55.

Hur J, Yoon CS, Ryu YH et al (2007) Accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for diagnosis of single bone metastasis: comparison with bone scintigraphy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31:812–819PubMedCrossRef

56.

Phan HT, Jager PL, Plukker JT et al (2007) Detection of bone metastases in thyroid cancer patients: bone scintigraphy or ¹⁸ F-FDG PET? Nucl Med Commun 28:597–602PubMedCrossRef

57.

Strobel K, Burger C, Brukhardt S et al (2007) Characterization of focal bone lesions in the axial skeleton: lesions in the axial skeleton: scintigraphy compared with SPECT and SPECT fused with CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:467–474CrossRef

58.

Ito S, Kato K, Ikeda M et al (2007) Comparison of ¹⁸ F-FDG PET and bone scintigraphy in detection of bone metastases of thyroid cancer. J Nucl Med 48:889–895PubMedCrossRef

59.

Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R et al (2007) Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol 17:939–949PubMedCrossRef

60.

Taira A, Herfkens RJ, Gambhir SS et al (2007) Detection of bone metastases: assessment of integrated FDG PET/CT Imaging. Radiology 243:204–211PubMedCrossRef

61.

Pfannenberg C, Aschoff P, Schanz S et al (2007) Prospective comparison of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in staging of advanced malignant melanoma. Eur J Cancer 43:557–564PubMedCrossRef

62.

Lecouvet FE, Geukens D, Stainier A et al (2007) Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton for detecting bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic and cost-effectiveness and comparison with current detection strategies. J Clin Oncol 25:3281–3287PubMedCrossRef

63.

Xu X, Ma L, Zhang JS et al (2008) Feasibility of whole body diffusion weighted imaging in detecting bone metastasis on 3.0 T MR scanner. Chin Med Sci J 23:151–157PubMedCrossRef

64.

Sadik M, Suurkula M, Hoglund P et al (2008) Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretations—a nationwide survey. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 35:1464–1472CrossRef

65.

Kim MR, Roh JL, Kin JS et al (2008) 18 F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy for detecting bone metastases in patients with malignancies of the upper aerodigestive tract. Oral Oncol 44:148–152PubMedCrossRef

66.

Bistow AR, Agrawal A, Evans AJ et al (2008) Can computerised tomography replace bone scintigraphy in detecting bone metastases from breast cancer? A prospective study. Breast 17:100–105

67.

Wu SQ, Liu JJ, Song SS et al (2008) Comparison of the value of ¹⁸ F-FDG PET and ^99mTc-MDP bone scan in the detection of bone metastases. Radiol Pract 23:1273–1277

68.

Song JW, Oh YM, Shim TS et al (2009) Efficacy comparison between ¹⁸ F-FDG PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in detecting bony metastases of non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 65:333–338PubMedCrossRef

69.

Takenaka D, Ohno Y, Matsumoto K et al (2009) Detection of bone metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients: comparison of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), whole-body MR Imaging without and with DWI, whole-Body FDG-PET/CT, and bone scintigraphy. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:298–308PubMedCrossRef

70.

Venkitaraman R, Cook G, Dearnaley D et al (2009) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with prostate cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 53:241–247PubMedCrossRef

71.

Min JW, Um SW, Yi JJ et al (2009) The Role of whole-Body FDG PET/CT, Tc 99 m MDP bone scintigraphy, and serum alkaline phosphatase in detecting bone metastasis in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Kor Med Sci 24:275–280CrossRef

72.

Costo S, Halley A, Bergot E et al (2009) Usefulness of 99mTc-depreotide scintigraphy for the diagnosis of bone metastases in non-small cell lung cancer stage III–IV. Med Nucl 33:201–210

73.

Kruger S, Buck AK, Mottaghy FM et al (2009) Detection of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer: ^99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, ¹⁸ F-fluoride PET or ¹⁸ F-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 36:1807–1812CrossRef

74.

Sohaib SA, Cook G, Allen SD et al (2009) Comparison of whole-body MRI and bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in renal cancer. Br J Radiol 82:632–639PubMedCrossRef

75.

Xu WN, Xin J, Yu SP et al (2009) Comparison of ¹⁸ F-FDG PET-CT and ^99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy in detection of bone metastases. J Chin Clin Med Imaging 20:323–327

76.

Liu NB, Ma L, Zhou W et al (2010) Bone metastasis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: the diagnostic role of F-18 FDG PET/CT. Eur J Radiol 74:231–235PubMedCrossRef

77.

Liu FY, Yen TC, Chen MY et al (2009) Detection of hematogenous bone metastasis in cervical cancer: ¹⁸ F-Fluorodeoxyglucose–positron emission tomography versus computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 115:5470–5480PubMedCrossRef

78.

Heusner T, Golitz P, Hamami M et al (2011) “One-stop-shop” staging: Should we prefer FDG-PET/CT or MRI for the detection of bone metastases? Eur J Radiol 78:430–435PubMedCrossRef

79.

Putzer D, Gabriel M, Henninger B et al (2009) Bone metastases in patients with neuroendocrine tumor:⁶⁸ Ga-DOTA-Tyr³-Octreotide PET in comparison to CT and bone scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 50:1214–1221PubMedCrossRef

80.

Zhao Z, Li L, Li FL et al (2010) Single photon emission computed tomography/spiral computed tomography fusion imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastasis in patients with known cancer. Skeletal Radiol 39:147–153PubMedCrossRef

81.

Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S et al (1999) Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 282:1061–1066PubMedCrossRef

82.

Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA (2001) A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med 20:2865–2884PubMedCrossRef

83.

Pham B, Platt R, McAuley L et al (2001) Is there a “best” way to detect and minimize publication bias? an empirical evaluation. Eval Health Prof 24:109–125PubMed

84.

Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2003) Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Radiology 226:24–28PubMedCrossRef

85.

Fay MP, Graubard BI, Freedman LS et al (1998) Conditional logistic regression with sandwich estimators: application to a meta-analysis. Biometrics 54:195–208PubMedCrossRef

86.

Bipat S, van Leeuwen MS, Comans EF et al (2005) Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR imaging, and PET for diagnosis – meta-analysis. Radiology 237:123–131PubMedCrossRef

87.

Tryciecky EW, Gottschalk A, Ludema K (1997) Oncologic imaging: interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI using the bone scan as a model. Semin Nucl Med 27:142–151PubMedCrossRef

88.

Deeks J (2001) Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. BMJ 323:157–162PubMedCrossRef

89.

Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R et al (1998) Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by ¹⁸FDG PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 16:3375–3379PubMed

90.

Muindi J, Coombes RC, Golding S et al (1983) The role of computed tomography in the detection of bone metastases in breast cancer patients. Br J Radiol 56:233–236PubMedCrossRef

91.

Karnholz R, Sze G (1991) Current imaging in spinal metastatic disease. Semin Oncol 18:158–169

92.

Vogler JB, Murphy WA (1988) Bone marrow imaging. Radiology 168:679–693PubMed

93.

Blake GM, Park-Holohan SJ, Cook GJ et al (2001) Quantitative studies of bone with the use of ¹⁸ F-fluoride and ^99mTc-methylene diphosphonate. Semin Nucl Med 31:28–49PubMedCrossRef

94.

Cook GJ, Fogelman I (2000) The role of positron emission tomography in the management of bone metastases. Cancer 88:2927–2933PubMedCrossRef

95.

Loeffler RK, DiSimone RN, Howland WJ (1975) Limitations of bone scanning in clinical oncology. JAMA 234:1228–1232PubMedCrossRef

96.

Roland J, van den Weygaert D, Krug B et al (1995) Metastases seen on SPECT imaging despite a normal planar bone scan. Clin Nucl Med 20:1052–1054PubMedCrossRef

97.

Sedonja I, Budihna NV (1999) The benefit of SPECT when added to planar scintigraphy in patients with bone metastases in the spine. Clin Nucl Med 24:407–413PubMedCrossRef

Title: Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing 18FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy
Authors: Hui-Lin Yang
Tao Liu
Xi-Ming Wang
Yong Xu
Sheng-Ming Deng
Publication date: 01-12-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 12/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2221-4

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2011

Contrast induced nephropathy: updated ESUR Contrast Media Safety Committee guidelines

Mortality and complication rates of percutaneous ablative techniques for the treatment of liver tumors: a systematic review

Visual assessment of posterior atrophy development of a MRI rating scale

Signal profile on Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and liver cirrhosis induced in rats: correlation with transporter expression

MR-Imaging of teeth and periodontal apparatus: an experimental study comparing high-resolution MRI with MDCT and CBCT

Preliminary observations and clinical value of N-acetyl resonances in ovarian tumours using in-vivo proton MR spectroscopy at 3T