There is nothing mystical about imaging in children. It differs from imaging in adults for three reasons: (1) Many of the more common diseases of the brain and spine encountered in children are different from those that occur in adults; there are also many diseases in children that are seldom if ever seen in adults. (2) The appearance of disease in children is often modified by the process of progressive maturation whereas in mature adults disease is often modified by the process of regressive aging — two very different processes pathophysiologically. (3) Even when “adult” diseases begin in childhood, they often appear very different by the time the child reaches maturity. The radiologist’s familiarity with these differences will allow him or her to successfully and competently perform imaging studies in children. A detailed discussion of these differences is beyond the scope of this chapter. Instead, some of the more controversial issues within the more common types of disease occurring in children under the age of 16 years will be presented here.
KeywordsSickle Cell Disease Periventricular Leukomalacia Metachromatic Leukodystrophy Glycerol Ether Pediatric Neuroradiology
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Barkovich AJ, Norman D (1989) Absence of the septum pellucidum: a useful sign in the diagnosis of congenital brain malformations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 9:1107–1114Google Scholar
- Barkovich AJ, Truwit CL (1990) Brain damage from perinatal asphyxia: correlation of MR findings with gestational age. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1:1087–1096Google Scholar
- Kjos BO, Umansky R, Barkovich AJ (1990) Brain MR imaging in children with developmental retardation of unknown cause: results in 76 cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1:1035–1040Google Scholar
- Valk J, van der Knaap MS (1989) Magnetic resonance of myelin, myelination, and myelin disorders. Springer-Verlag, New York, p 82Google Scholar
- Withers HR, Peters LJ, Kogelnik HS (1980) The pathobiology of late effects of irradiation. In: Meyn RE, Withers HR (eds) Radiation biology in cancer research. Raven, New York, pp 439–448Google Scholar