Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology

Thomas L. Slamovits, T. A. Gardner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Computed tomographic scanning is an excellent modality for evaluation of most orbital and intracranial tumors and strokes. However, MR scanning is definitely superior to CT when evaluating for multiple sclerosis, posterior fossa lesions (evaluation of gaze palsies, internuclear ophthalmoplegia, and downbeat nystagmus), or when assessing an area where sagittal scanning is important (chiasmal lesions). Magnetic resonance has increased specificity when the CT is equivocal. Although MR and CT may be complementary in the information they provide, many clinical studies have shown MR to be superior to CT in evaluating cerebral infarctions, hematomas, the intracanalicular optic nerve, optic chiasm, sella turcica, and the cavernous sinus. Magnetic resonance generally has replaced metrizamide CT cisternography as the procedure of choice for evaluating the suprasellar cistern and posterior fossa. Computed tomography is still preferable for major trauma, especially involving acute fractures and hematomas, although MR is more sensitive to the more subtle intracerebral lesions, such as shear injuries and subdural hematomas, that may provide prognostic information. Computed tomography also is preferred in situations where detecting small amounts of calcification is important for the differential diagnosis. As the development of MR imaging continues with faster scan times, finer spatial resolution, the use of paramagnetic contrast agents, and with increased availability and decreased cost, MR imaging may become preferable to CT as the imaging modality of choice for the CNS and orbit.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)555-568
Number of pages14
JournalOphthalmology
Volume96
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1989
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ophthalmology
Neuroimaging
Hematoma
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Tomography
Sella Turcica
Metrizamide
Ocular Motility Disorders
Optic Chiasm
Cavernous Sinus
Subdural Hematoma
Cerebral Infarction
Wounds and Injuries
Orbit
Optic Nerve
Paralysis
Contrast Media
Multiple Sclerosis
Differential Diagnosis
Stroke

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Slamovits, T. L., & Gardner, T. A. (1989). Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology. Ophthalmology, 96(4), 555-568.

Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology. / Slamovits, Thomas L.; Gardner, T. A.

In: Ophthalmology, Vol. 96, No. 4, 1989, p. 555-568.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Slamovits, TL & Gardner, TA 1989, 'Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology', Ophthalmology, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 555-568.
Slamovits, Thomas L. ; Gardner, T. A. / Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology. In: Ophthalmology. 1989 ; Vol. 96, No. 4. pp. 555-568.
@article{17233832aa304aae9a1e8086990b7898,
title = "Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology",
abstract = "Computed tomographic scanning is an excellent modality for evaluation of most orbital and intracranial tumors and strokes. However, MR scanning is definitely superior to CT when evaluating for multiple sclerosis, posterior fossa lesions (evaluation of gaze palsies, internuclear ophthalmoplegia, and downbeat nystagmus), or when assessing an area where sagittal scanning is important (chiasmal lesions). Magnetic resonance has increased specificity when the CT is equivocal. Although MR and CT may be complementary in the information they provide, many clinical studies have shown MR to be superior to CT in evaluating cerebral infarctions, hematomas, the intracanalicular optic nerve, optic chiasm, sella turcica, and the cavernous sinus. Magnetic resonance generally has replaced metrizamide CT cisternography as the procedure of choice for evaluating the suprasellar cistern and posterior fossa. Computed tomography is still preferable for major trauma, especially involving acute fractures and hematomas, although MR is more sensitive to the more subtle intracerebral lesions, such as shear injuries and subdural hematomas, that may provide prognostic information. Computed tomography also is preferred in situations where detecting small amounts of calcification is important for the differential diagnosis. As the development of MR imaging continues with faster scan times, finer spatial resolution, the use of paramagnetic contrast agents, and with increased availability and decreased cost, MR imaging may become preferable to CT as the imaging modality of choice for the CNS and orbit.",
author = "Slamovits, {Thomas L.} and Gardner, {T. A.}",
year = "1989",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "555--568",
journal = "Ophthalmology",
issn = "0161-6420",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Neuroimaging in neuro-ophthalmology

AU - Slamovits, Thomas L.

AU - Gardner, T. A.

PY - 1989

Y1 - 1989

N2 - Computed tomographic scanning is an excellent modality for evaluation of most orbital and intracranial tumors and strokes. However, MR scanning is definitely superior to CT when evaluating for multiple sclerosis, posterior fossa lesions (evaluation of gaze palsies, internuclear ophthalmoplegia, and downbeat nystagmus), or when assessing an area where sagittal scanning is important (chiasmal lesions). Magnetic resonance has increased specificity when the CT is equivocal. Although MR and CT may be complementary in the information they provide, many clinical studies have shown MR to be superior to CT in evaluating cerebral infarctions, hematomas, the intracanalicular optic nerve, optic chiasm, sella turcica, and the cavernous sinus. Magnetic resonance generally has replaced metrizamide CT cisternography as the procedure of choice for evaluating the suprasellar cistern and posterior fossa. Computed tomography is still preferable for major trauma, especially involving acute fractures and hematomas, although MR is more sensitive to the more subtle intracerebral lesions, such as shear injuries and subdural hematomas, that may provide prognostic information. Computed tomography also is preferred in situations where detecting small amounts of calcification is important for the differential diagnosis. As the development of MR imaging continues with faster scan times, finer spatial resolution, the use of paramagnetic contrast agents, and with increased availability and decreased cost, MR imaging may become preferable to CT as the imaging modality of choice for the CNS and orbit.

AB - Computed tomographic scanning is an excellent modality for evaluation of most orbital and intracranial tumors and strokes. However, MR scanning is definitely superior to CT when evaluating for multiple sclerosis, posterior fossa lesions (evaluation of gaze palsies, internuclear ophthalmoplegia, and downbeat nystagmus), or when assessing an area where sagittal scanning is important (chiasmal lesions). Magnetic resonance has increased specificity when the CT is equivocal. Although MR and CT may be complementary in the information they provide, many clinical studies have shown MR to be superior to CT in evaluating cerebral infarctions, hematomas, the intracanalicular optic nerve, optic chiasm, sella turcica, and the cavernous sinus. Magnetic resonance generally has replaced metrizamide CT cisternography as the procedure of choice for evaluating the suprasellar cistern and posterior fossa. Computed tomography is still preferable for major trauma, especially involving acute fractures and hematomas, although MR is more sensitive to the more subtle intracerebral lesions, such as shear injuries and subdural hematomas, that may provide prognostic information. Computed tomography also is preferred in situations where detecting small amounts of calcification is important for the differential diagnosis. As the development of MR imaging continues with faster scan times, finer spatial resolution, the use of paramagnetic contrast agents, and with increased availability and decreased cost, MR imaging may become preferable to CT as the imaging modality of choice for the CNS and orbit.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024512502&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024512502&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 96

SP - 555

EP - 568

JO - Ophthalmology

JF - Ophthalmology

SN - 0161-6420

IS - 4

ER -