AlgraPRBloemJL: Detection of vertebral metastases: Comparison between MR imaging and bone scintigraphy. Radiographics11: 219–232, 1991.
2.
AvrahamiETadmorR: Early MR demonstration of spinal metastases in patients with normal radiographs and CT and radionuclide bone scans. J Comput Assist Tomogr13(4): 598–602, 1989.
3.
BakerLLGoodmanSB: Benign versus pathologic compression fractures of vertebral bodies: Assessment with conventional spin-echo, chemical-shift, and STIR MR imaging. Radiology174: 495–502, 1990.
4.
BlewsDEWangH: Intradural spinal metastases in pediatric patients with primary intracranial neoplasms: Gd-DTPA enhanced MR vs CT myelography. J Comput Assist Tomogr14(5): 730–735, 1990.
5.
BydderGMYoungIR: MR imaging: Clinical use of the inversion recovery sequence. J Comput Assist Tomogr9: 659–675, 1985.
6.
CarmodyRFYangPJ: Spinal cord compression due to metastatic disease: Diagnosis with MR imaging versus myelography. Radiology173: 225–229, 1989.
7.
ConstableRTSmithRCGoreJC: Signal to noise and contrast in fast spin echo (FSE) and inversion recovery fast spin echo. J Comput Assist Tomogr16(1): 41–47, 1992.
8.
DoomsGCFisherMR: Bone marrow imaging: Magnetic resonance studies related to age and sex. Radiology155: 429–432, 1986.
9.
DwyerAJFrankJA: Short-T1 inversion-recovery pulse sequence: Analysis and initial experience in cancer imaging. Radiology168: 827–836, 1988.
10.
GoderskyJCSmokerWRKKnutsonRK: Use of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of metastatic spinal disease. Neurosurgery21: 676–680, 1987.
11.
HennigJNaurethAFreidburgH: RARE imaging: A fast imaging method for clinical MR. Magn Reson Med3: 823–833, 1986.
12.
HennigJFreidburgH: Clinical applications and methodological developements of the RARE technique. Magn Reson Med6: 391–395, 1988.
13.
HudsonTMSpringfieldDS: Benign exostoses and exostotic chondro sarcomas: Evaluation of cartilage cap thickness by CT. Radiology152: 595–599, 1984.
14.
JonesKMSchwartzRB: Fast spin echo MR in the detection of vertebral metastasis: Comparison of three sequences. Am J Neuroradiol15: 401–407, 1994.
15.
KenneyPJGilulaLAMurphyWA: The use of computed tomography to distinguish osteochondroma from chondro sarcoma. Radiology139: 129–137, 1981.
MulkernRVWongSTSV: Contrast manipulation and artifact assessment of 2D and 3D RARE sequences. Magn Reson Imaging8: 557–566, 1990.
21.
QuiriniGEMeyerJRV: Osteochondroma of the thoracic spine: An unusual cause of spinal cord compression. Am J Neuroradiol17: 961–964, 1996.
22.
RahmouniADivineMV: Detection of multiple myeloma involving the spine: Efficacy of fat suppression and contrast enhanced MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol160: 1049–1052, 1993.
23.
SchellingerD: Patterns of anterior spinal canal involvement by neoplasms and infections. Am J Neuroradiol17: 953–959, 1996.
24.
SmithSRWilliamsCEV: Bone marrow disorders: Characterization with quantitative MR imaging. Radiology172: 805–810, 1989.
25.
SmokerWRKGoderdkyJCV: The role of MR imaging in evaluating metastatic spinal disease. Am J Neuroradiol8: 901–908, 1987.
26.
FeckensteinJLArcherBTV: Fast short-tau inversion-recovery MR imaging. Radiology179: 99–504, 1991.
27.
StimacGKPorterBAV: Gadolinium-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging of spinal neoplasms: Preliminary investigation and comparison with unenhanced spin-echo and STIR sequences. Am J Neuroradiol9: 839–846, 1988.
YousemDMSchnallMD: MR examination for spinal cord compression: Impact of a multicoil system on length of study. J Comput Assist Tomogr15: 598–604, 1991.
30.
YuhWTCZacharCKV: Vertebral compression fractures: Distinction between benign and malignant causes with MR imaging. Radiology172: 215–218, 1989.
31.
WeinerSNNeumannDRRzeszotarskiMS: Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and radionuclide bone imaging of vertebral fractures. Clin Nucl Med9: 666–670, 1989.
