Skip to main content
Log in

Magnetresonanztomographie in der Urologie

Aktuelle Techniken

Magnetic resonance imaging in urology

Current techniques

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Urologe, Ausgabe A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Obwohl die Sonographie und die Computertomographie immer noch zu den kostengünstigeren und verbreiteten Verfahren in der bildgebenden Diagnostik urologischer Erkrankungen zählen, gewinnt die Magnetresonanztomographie zunehmend an Bedeutung. Mit einer einzigen Untersuchungsmethode ist eine komplette Darstellung des gesamten pathoanatomischen Spektrums urologischer Erkrankungen möglich. Freie Wahl der Schichtorientierung, hoher Weichteilkontrast und örtliche Auflösung sowie das Fehlen ionisierender Strahlen gehören zu den bekannten Vorteilen der MRT. Technische Weiterentwicklungen reduzierten deutlich die Akquisitionszeiten und ermöglichen aktuell Real-time-Bildgebung und die Darstellung des Gefäßsystems sowie des ableitenden Harnwegsystems mit deutlich reduzierten Bewegungsartefakten. Darüber hinaus stellt bei Patienten mit eingeschränkter Nierenfunktion oder bekannter Unverträglichkeit für jodhaltige Röntgenkontrastmittel die kontrastmittelverstärkte MRT die Untersuchungsmethode der Wahl dar.

Abstract

Due to low costs and common availability, ultrasonography and computed tomography still represent the most common diagnostic tools in uroradiology. However, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is gaining more and more importance since this imaging modality allows for a comprehensive examination of almost the complete spectrum of urologic diseases, including congenital malformations. The most important advantages of MRI are the free choice of slice orientation, high soft tissue contrast and high resolution as well as the lack of radiation. Technical progresses in hard and software components have led to a reduction in acquisition time, allowing for real-time imaging as well as MR angiography and MR urography with a significant reduction in motion artifacts. In addition, contrast enhanced MRI represents the imaging modality of choice in patients with reduced renal function or known allergy against iodinated contrast agent.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6

Literatur

  1. Bilal MM, Brown JJ (1997) MR imaging of renal and adrenal masses in children. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 5(1): 179–197

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Blandino A, Gaeta M, Minutoli F, Salamone I, Magno C, Scribano E, Pandolfo I (2002) MR urography of the ureter. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179: 1307–1314

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brown ED, Semelka RC (1995) Magnetic resonance imaging of the adrenal gland and kidney. Top Magn Resonan Imaging 7 (2): 90–101

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Davidson AJ, Hartmann DS, Choyke PL, Wagner BJ (1997) Radiologic assessment of renal masses implications for patient care. Radiology 202: 297–305

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. El-Diasty T, Mansour O, Farouk A (2003) Diuretic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography versus intravenous urography for depiction of non-dilated urinary tracts. Abdom Imaging 28: 135–145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gilfeather M, Woodward PJ (1998) MR imaging of the adrenal glands and the kidneys. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 19: 53–66

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Glockner JF (2001) Three-dimensional Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography: application for abdominal imaging. RadioGraphics 21: 357–370

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Huch Boni RA, Debatin JF, Krestin GP (1996) Contrast enhanced MR imaging of the kidneys and adrenal glands. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 4 (1): 101–131

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kreft BP, Muller-Miny H, Sommer T et al. (1997) Diagnostic value of MR imaging in comparison to CT in the detection and differential diagnosis of renal masses: ROC analysis. Eur Radiol 7: 542–547

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Laissy JP, Trillaud H, Douek P (2002) MR angiography: noninvasive vascular imaging of the abdomen. Abdom Imaging 27: 488–506

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leung DA, Hagspiel KD, Angle JF, Spinosa DJ, Matsumoto AH, Butty S (2002) MR angiography of the renal arteries. Radiol Clin North Am 40 (4): 847–865

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nolte-Ernsting CC, Staatz G, Tacke J, Gunther RW (2003) MR urography today. Abdom Imaging 28: 191–209

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Nolte-Ernsting CC, Adam GB, Gunther RW (2001) MR urography: examination techniques and clinical applications. Eur Radiol 11 (3): 355–372

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Riccabona M (2003) Imaging of tumours in infancy and childhood. Eur Radiol 13 Suppl 4: L116–129

    Google Scholar 

  15. Yarnashita Y, Miyazaki T, Hatanaka Y, Takahashi M (1995) MRI of small renal cell carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 19: 759–765

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt:

Keine Angaben

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Schneider.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schneider, G., Seidel, R. & Fries, P. Magnetresonanztomographie in der Urologie. Urologe [A] 43, 1385–1390 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-004-0712-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-004-0712-5

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation