Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
4221979 | Clinical Imaging | 2011 | 9 Pages |
Abstract
PurposeTo compare direct magnetic resonance galactography (dMRG) and conventional galactography (CGal).Materials and MethodsThirty women underwent CGal and dMRG. Duct localization and the depth of the assumed underlying pathology in CGal and dMRG were analyzed.ResultsComparing CGal and dMRG, there was no significant difference regarding sector localization, but for depth of pathology (P=.023).ConclusionDuct localization with dMRG was possible with the same reliability as with CGal. Thus, dMRG may have the potential to become an alternative method to CGal.
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Radiology and Imaging
Authors
Evelyn Wenkel, Rolf Janka, Michael Uder, Michael Doellinger, Katja Melzer, Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland, Siegfried A. Schwab,