Quantitative Assessment of Parenchymal and Ventricular Readjustment to Intracranial Pressure Relief

American Journal of Neuroradiology

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 377-381

  Preul, Christoph ^a,b   Tittgemeyer, Marc ^a   Lindner, Dirk ^b   Trantakis, Christos ^b   Meixensberger, Jürgen ^b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN COGNITIVE AND BRAIN SCIENCES   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN THIRD VENTRICLE; BRAIN VENTRICLE; CASE REPORT; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HYDROCEPHALUS; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTRACRANIAL PRESSURE; MALE; MONITORING; NONLINEAR SYSTEM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ADULT; CEREBRAL VENTRICLES; ENDOSCOPY; HUMANS; HYDROCEPHALUS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VENTRICULOSTOMY;

EID: 1642398358     PISSN: 01956108     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Ernestus RI, Krüger K, Ernst S, Lackner K, Klug N. Relevance of magnetic resonance imaging for ventricular endoscopy. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2002;45:72-77
2. Morota N, Watabe T, Inukai T, Hongo K, Nakagawa H. Anatomical variants in the floor of the third ventricle: implications for endoscopic third ventriculostomy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000;69:531-534
3. Rohde V, Gilsbach JM. Anomalies and variants of the endoscopic anatomy for third ventriculostomy. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2000;43:111-117
4. Vinas FC, Dujovny N, Dujovny M. Microanatomical basis for the third ventriculostomy. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 1996;39:116-121
5. Wilcock DJ, Jaspan T, Worthington BS, Punt J. Neuro-endoscopic third ventriculostomy: evaluation with magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Radiol 1997;52:50-54
6. Goumnerova LC, Frim DM. Treatment of hydrocephalus with third ventriculocisternostomy: outcome and CSF flow patterns. Pediatr Neurosurg 1997;27:149-152
7. Schroeder HW, Niendorf WR, Gaab MR. Complications of endoscopic third ventriculostomy. J Neurosurg 2002;96:1032-1040
8. Kulkarni AV, Drake JM, Armstrong DC, Dirks PB. Imaging correlates of successful endoscopic third ventriculostomy. J Neurosurg 2000;92:915-919
9. Schwartz TH, Ho B, Prestigiacomo CJ, Bruce JN, Feldstein NA, Goodman RR. Ventricular volume following third ventriculostomy. J Neurosurg 1999;91:20-25
10. Schwartz TH, Yoon SS, Cutruzzola FW, Goodman RR. Third ventriculostomy: post-operative ventricular size and outcome. Minim Invas Neurosurg 1996;39:122-129
11. Buxton N, Turner B, Ramli N, Vloeberghs M. Changes in third ventricular size with neuroendoscopic third ventriculostomy: a blinded study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2002;72:385-387
12. Wolters, CH. Influence of tissue conductivity inhomogeneity and anisotropy to EEG/MEG based source localization in the human brain [PhD Thesis]. Leipzig: University of Leipzig; 2003
13. Hojjatoleslami SA, Kruggel F. Segmentation of large brain lesions. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001;20:666-669
14. Schnack HG, Hulshoff HE, Baare WF, Viergever MA, Kahn RS. Automatic segmentation of the ventricular system from MR images of the human brain. Neuroimage 2001;14:95-104
15. Tittgemeyer M, Wollny G, Kruggel F. Visualising deformation fields computed by non-linear image registration. Comput Visual Sci 2002;5:45-51
16. Wollny G, Kruggel F. Computational cost of non-rigid registration algorithms based on fluid dynamics. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2002;21:946-952