4.4 Review

MRI and CT appearances in metabolic encephalopathies due to systemic diseases in adults

期刊

CLINICAL RADIOLOGY
卷 68, 期 6, 页码 545-554

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2012.05.021

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The term encephalopathy refers to a clinical scenario of diffuse brain dysfunction, commonly due to a systemic, metabolic, or toxic derangement. Often the clinical evaluation is unsatisfactory in this scenario and imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis, assessment of treatment response, and prognostication of the disorder. Hence, it is important for radiologists to be familiar with the imaging features of some relatively frequently acquired metabolic encephalopathies encountered in the hospital setting. This study reviews the computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features of a number of metabolic encephalopathies that occur as part of systemic diseases in adults. The following conditions are covered in this review: hypoglycaemic encephalopathy, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, non-ketotic hyperglycaemia, hepatic encephalopathy, uraemic encephalopathy, hyperammonaemic encephalopathy, and posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome. MRI is the imaging method of choice in evaluating these conditions. Due to their high metabolic activity, bilateral basal ganglia changes are evident in the majority of cases. Concurrent imaging abnormalities in other parts of the central nervous system often provide useful diagnostic information about the likely underlying cause of the encephalopathy. Besides this, abnormal signal intensity and diffusion restriction patterns on MRI and MR spectroscopy features may provide important clues as to the diagnosis and guide further management. Frequently, the diagnosis is not straightforward and typical imaging features require correlation with clinical and laboratory data for accurate assessment. (C) 2012 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据