Similar articles

• Re: the revised FIGO staging system for uterine malignancies: implications for MR imaging.

  Blair PS, Winters SD, Armstrong GA, Low G, McCluggage WG, Grey AC. Blair PS, et al. Radiographics. 2013 Sep-Oct;33(5):1520-1. doi: 10.1148/rg.335135007. Radiographics. 2013. PMID: 24025939 No abstract available.
• [Magnetic resonance tomography of the uterus. Study techniques, normal and pathologic anatomy].

  Nauert T, Hamm B, Wolf KJ. Nauert T, et al. Rontgenpraxis. 1991 Mar;44(3):83-8. Rontgenpraxis. 1991. PMID: 2035117 Review. German. No abstract available.
• Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Benign and Malignant Uterine Neoplasms.

  Leursen G, Gardner CS, Sagebiel T, Patnana M, de CastroFaria S, Devine CE, Bhosale PR. Leursen G, et al. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2015 Aug;36(4):348-60. doi: 10.1053/j.sult.2015.05.003. Epub 2015 Jun 11. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2015. PMID: 26296485
• T2*-weighted imaging in the assessment of the non-perfused volume of uterine fibroids following magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation.

  Liu J, Wei J, Keserci B, Zhang J, Yang X, Wang X. Liu J, et al. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016 Jan;132(1):100-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.07.005. Epub 2015 Oct 3. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016. PMID: 26475075 No abstract available.
• Uterine artery embolization: pre- and post-procedural evaluation using magnetic resonance imaging.

  Siddiqui N, Nikolaidis P, Hammond N, Miller FH. Siddiqui N, et al. Abdom Imaging. 2013 Oct;38(5):1161-77. doi: 10.1007/s00261-013-9990-y. Abdom Imaging. 2013. PMID: 23471598 Review.