7 ms·

From what I saw of this at RSNA, they were only demonstrating head scans. The scanning volume is big enough for a head but not a full body. The magnet is low-po

From what I saw of this at RSNA, they were only demonstrating head scans. The scanning volume is big enough for a head but not a full body. The magnet is low-power enough that you could walk within a few feet of it during operation without danger. Cool device which could make MRI scans more accessible, and also paves the way for specialized scanners that only focus on a particular body part. I like medical tech that does a "good enough" job in exchange for being much cheaper than fully featured devices.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
This would still be hugely helpful for brain imaging en route to a medical facility, similar to what’s being done with experimental mobile stroke units, so medical practitioners are ready to act upon a patient’s arrival.
- mohn 7y ago
  Maybe. MRI is not the preferred brain imaging modality in emergency situations, X-ray computed tomography is. Consider patients who are unconscious (or awake but unreliable) due to head trauma, stroke, etc. You can't do a proper MR safety screening interview to find out if they have ferrous metal or other conductive objects in their head. The magnetic field can potentially torque an old aneurysm clip or piece of shrapnel, and the radio frequency excitation field can cause heating and burns if there are antenna-like conductors present. MRI is slow and the images are easy to ruin if the subject moves around too much during the long acquisition time, so bouncing around in the back of an ambulance isn't the ideal setting. A 3D volume with whole head coverage and suitably fine spatial resolution can take several minutes to acquire, versus just a few seconds for X-ray CT. The MRI signal to noise ratio is also proportional to field strength, so low field systems like this are at a disadvantage for image quality. On the plus side, low field does mean less risk of moving ferrous material inside the subject.
  - 01100011 7y ago
    > You can't do a proper MR safety screening interview Are we really not capable of detecting such dangers externally without patient input? It seems like detecting even small pieces of metal would be relatively trivial.
    - askvictor 7y ago
      Presumably with an X-ray/CT scan.
      - numpad0 7y ago
        Can’t you apply a minuscule power and watch out for overcurrent?
        ska 7y ago
        No, the main field is effectively permanent.
        numpad0 7y ago
        I mean, some sort of non-super-conducting MRI analogue device that the patient will have to go through.
        ska 7y ago
        You could find big things that way, but maybe not small things that were deep. I suspect it is hard to make something powerful enough to detect everything that might be an issue in say a 7T field, yet still safe.
        Amarok 7y ago
        Some devices are safe to scan at lower intensities and for less time, but it's the radiologist who check on that, so not my expertise.
      - mohn 7y ago
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - cma 7y ago
    https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/849 https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/849 > According to the guideline, diffusion MRI should be considered more useful than a CT scan for diagnosing acute ischemic stroke within 12 hours of a person’s first stroke symptom. In one large study, among others, that was reviewed for the guideline, stroke was accurately detected 83 percent of the time by MRI versus 26 percent of the time by CT. Main thing they need to know is stroke vs aneurism and accuracy is really important.
  - Amarok 7y ago
    It has applications in emergencies[1].Speaking for the UK, every stroke center will want one. Dirt cheap as well. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22340458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22340458
- prostheticvamp 7y ago
  MRI is not an emergency technology. Most hospitals will outright refuse to do them for the vast majority of inpatient stays. This technology will mostly end up in imaging centers, improving throughput.
  - Mountain_Skies 7y ago
    When I slipped on some ice eight years ago and hit my head, the ER gave an MRI. Now I wonder if they were just pumping up the bill, which would be strange because at the time they thought I didn't have insurance.
    - prostheticvamp 7y ago
      Could be pumping up billings, but odds are decent they weren’t. An insurance company’s default would be to refuse payment on an ER MRI, so the docs must have felt reasonably confident they needed it and could justify it to insurance or were willing to get reamed out by management if they couldn’t. Still, an ER MRI is wildly unlikely. “Possible evolving emergency” and “an hour in a tube where we can’t see you” don’t play well together. Any chance you’re confusing CT scan for MRI? Cause -that- we would do for a head trauma like 1000% of the time.
      - sterlind 7y ago
        I had an MRI at the ER for a paralysis attack several years ago. I stabilized after IV fluids were given, they found extremely high neutrophils and thought sepsis, but I was lucid and had no fever. They gave me the option of waiting there for ~6 hours for the MRI shift to start, and I agreed. they found no sepsis or cauda equina, discharged me and told me to come back if it happened again. fortunately, it hasn't yet. I think the combination of weird blood work + medical mystery + stabilized meant I got an MRI. wish they'd gotten to the bottom of it..
      - ska 7y ago
        You can do useful imaging in well under 5 minutes with modern MR, so it’s not like like this is fundamentally impractical, it the workflow would have to be tightened up.
- iCarrot 7y ago
  Rather than emergency situations, I imagine this would benefit hospitals in poorer, remote areas. For example, an island hospital which have no access to adequate equipment to give adequate diagnosis. Islanders end up having to be airlifted or transported by boats to an inland hospital for anything semi-serious and above.
- pvaldes 7y ago
  > This would still be hugely helpful for brain imaging en route to a medical facility I'm speculating, but probably not. The images would be blurry and unusable if taken in a busy ambulance on road to the hospital. Could do more harm than good. Having this in a stable home would be awesome on the other hand, but there is too much vibration and everybody trying to grasp handlebars and keep equilibrium when you are in an ambulance on duty. I could be wrong. I do not master this technology, but if you need absolutely remain motionless in the big machines, I assume than smaller ones would have the same requisite. Ambulances are not stable by default. Everything bounce.
glitchc 7y ago
Something that fits a head will also fit a hand, foot, arm, leg, every extremity except torso. The benefits are tremendous.
- xbmcuser 7y ago
  Yeah specially for people that cant sit still in the mri machine. My cousin is claustrophobic he just couldn't stay still enough they had to sedate him in the end.
  - consp 7y ago
    Upright MRI's are sometimes used for that (claustrophobia). Some might be available nearby. They are not quite common but not that rare either. Depends on the scan as not everything can be done as far as I know due to lower magnetic fields.
    - mattkrause 7y ago
      If you're looking for this, the key word is often "Open" MRI.
- ska 7y ago
  That part is harder than it seems, good quality imaging of many of those locations is hard with a body coil. So the fact you can physically fit a leg in, say, doesn’t give you usable knee imaging. There also may be issues with the shape of the field if it is too tuned to cranial imaging, but the center should be pretty flat. I’m not saying it couldn’t work with a bunch of extra RF engineering, but it’s not a given. For that matter some locations mist don’t have very good mr imaging regardless of setup.
jcims 7y ago
Having a couple of these around might also free up the full sized devices for scans that require a full size device.
- m463 7y ago
  I was thinking that inexpensive devices might lead to MRIs outside of the 1st world. quick search shows in 2016 USA has 37 mri/1mm people, mexico has 2 mri/1mm people
voicedYoda 7y ago
This is not technical nor attempting to be glib. I've been to the RSNA, am involved in healthcare software in the USA, and seeing what companies like Phillips, GE, et al, spend on floor space at this conference, it seems difficult to imagine these companies yielding their market position for cheaper machines to reduce costs. MRI equipment is huge business (these companies don't bat an eye spending $1,000,000+ for a conference such as the RSNA because this is where they wine and dine and make every hospital exec feel "special" so when it comes time to buy x MRIs, the sale alone will pay back the conference cost 10 fold. These conferences are expensive. The sales pipe is long (and thus expensive). There may be companies creating and selling these, but the heavyweights don't like losing a market opportunity in "their" hospitals. I'd be very reticent to think there will ever be lower costs in the ER for offering said device/service. Please don't get me wrong, I'm excited for limited use machines that can provide the basic information needed at a fraction of the price. I'm very leery of US healthcare institutions making a rational, patient-friendly cost conscious decision.
- giarc 7y ago
  These won't replace existing MRI machines though. These will be an additional purchase by hospitals or purchased for small, rural hospitals that would never buy an MRI machine in the first place.
tootie 7y ago
I think the real takeaway is that this kind of device is possible and they've given a blueprint. It will now be possible to start engineering new form factors, have scanners that are mobile, or maybe scan dogs and cats.
collyw 7y ago
> The magnet is low-power enough that you could walk within a few feet of it during operation without danger. That was going to be my question. From my current understanding you can't go into the same room as an MRI scanner with any metal in your pockets. The portable nature of this device made me question the safety aspect.

toomuchtodo 7y ago

This would still be hugely helpful for brain imaging en route to a medical facility, similar to what’s being done with experimental mobile stroke units, so medical practitioners are ready to act upon a patient’s arrival.

mohn 7y ago
Maybe. MRI is not the preferred brain imaging modality in emergency situations, X-ray computed tomography is. Consider patients who are unconscious (or awake but unreliable) due to head trauma, stroke, etc. You can't do a proper MR safety screening interview to find out if they have ferrous metal or other conductive objects in their head. The magnetic field can potentially torque an old aneurysm clip or piece of shrapnel, and the radio frequency excitation field can cause heating and burns if there are antenna-like conductors present. MRI is slow and the images are easy to ruin if the subject moves around too much during the long acquisition time, so bouncing around in the back of an ambulance isn't the ideal setting. A 3D volume with whole head coverage and suitably fine spatial resolution can take several minutes to acquire, versus just a few seconds for X-ray CT. The MRI signal to noise ratio is also proportional to field strength, so low field systems like this are at a disadvantage for image quality. On the plus side, low field does mean less risk of moving ferrous material inside the subject.
- 01100011 7y ago
  > You can't do a proper MR safety screening interview Are we really not capable of detecting such dangers externally without patient input? It seems like detecting even small pieces of metal would be relatively trivial.
  - askvictor 7y ago
    Presumably with an X-ray/CT scan.
    - numpad0 7y ago
      Can’t you apply a minuscule power and watch out for overcurrent?
      - ska 7y ago
        No, the main field is effectively permanent.
        numpad0 7y ago
        I mean, some sort of non-super-conducting MRI analogue device that the patient will have to go through.
        ska 7y ago
        You could find big things that way, but maybe not small things that were deep. I suspect it is hard to make something powerful enough to detect everything that might be an issue in say a 7T field, yet still safe.
      - Amarok 7y ago
        Some devices are safe to scan at lower intensities and for less time, but it's the radiologist who check on that, so not my expertise.
    - mohn 7y ago
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- cma 7y ago
  https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/849 https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/849 > According to the guideline, diffusion MRI should be considered more useful than a CT scan for diagnosing acute ischemic stroke within 12 hours of a person’s first stroke symptom. In one large study, among others, that was reviewed for the guideline, stroke was accurately detected 83 percent of the time by MRI versus 26 percent of the time by CT. Main thing they need to know is stroke vs aneurism and accuracy is really important.
- Amarok 7y ago
  It has applications in emergencies[1].Speaking for the UK, every stroke center will want one. Dirt cheap as well. [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22340458 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22340458
prostheticvamp 7y ago
MRI is not an emergency technology. Most hospitals will outright refuse to do them for the vast majority of inpatient stays. This technology will mostly end up in imaging centers, improving throughput.
- Mountain_Skies 7y ago
  When I slipped on some ice eight years ago and hit my head, the ER gave an MRI. Now I wonder if they were just pumping up the bill, which would be strange because at the time they thought I didn't have insurance.
  - prostheticvamp 7y ago
    Could be pumping up billings, but odds are decent they weren’t. An insurance company’s default would be to refuse payment on an ER MRI, so the docs must have felt reasonably confident they needed it and could justify it to insurance or were willing to get reamed out by management if they couldn’t. Still, an ER MRI is wildly unlikely. “Possible evolving emergency” and “an hour in a tube where we can’t see you” don’t play well together. Any chance you’re confusing CT scan for MRI? Cause -that- we would do for a head trauma like 1000% of the time.
    - sterlind 7y ago
      I had an MRI at the ER for a paralysis attack several years ago. I stabilized after IV fluids were given, they found extremely high neutrophils and thought sepsis, but I was lucid and had no fever. They gave me the option of waiting there for ~6 hours for the MRI shift to start, and I agreed. they found no sepsis or cauda equina, discharged me and told me to come back if it happened again. fortunately, it hasn't yet. I think the combination of weird blood work + medical mystery + stabilized meant I got an MRI. wish they'd gotten to the bottom of it..
    - ska 7y ago
      You can do useful imaging in well under 5 minutes with modern MR, so it’s not like like this is fundamentally impractical, it the workflow would have to be tightened up.
iCarrot 7y ago
Rather than emergency situations, I imagine this would benefit hospitals in poorer, remote areas. For example, an island hospital which have no access to adequate equipment to give adequate diagnosis. Islanders end up having to be airlifted or transported by boats to an inland hospital for anything semi-serious and above.
pvaldes 7y ago
> This would still be hugely helpful for brain imaging en route to a medical facility I'm speculating, but probably not. The images would be blurry and unusable if taken in a busy ambulance on road to the hospital. Could do more harm than good. Having this in a stable home would be awesome on the other hand, but there is too much vibration and everybody trying to grasp handlebars and keep equilibrium when you are in an ambulance on duty. I could be wrong. I do not master this technology, but if you need absolutely remain motionless in the big machines, I assume than smaller ones would have the same requisite. Ambulances are not stable by default. Everything bounce.

glitchc 7y ago

Something that fits a head will also fit a hand, foot, arm, leg, every extremity except torso. The benefits are tremendous.

xbmcuser 7y ago
Yeah specially for people that cant sit still in the mri machine. My cousin is claustrophobic he just couldn't stay still enough they had to sedate him in the end.
- consp 7y ago
  Upright MRI's are sometimes used for that (claustrophobia). Some might be available nearby. They are not quite common but not that rare either. Depends on the scan as not everything can be done as far as I know due to lower magnetic fields.
  - mattkrause 7y ago
    If you're looking for this, the key word is often "Open" MRI.
ska 7y ago
That part is harder than it seems, good quality imaging of many of those locations is hard with a body coil. So the fact you can physically fit a leg in, say, doesn’t give you usable knee imaging. There also may be issues with the shape of the field if it is too tuned to cranial imaging, but the center should be pretty flat. I’m not saying it couldn’t work with a bunch of extra RF engineering, but it’s not a given. For that matter some locations mist don’t have very good mr imaging regardless of setup.

jcims 7y ago

Having a couple of these around might also free up the full sized devices for scans that require a full size device.

m463 7y ago
I was thinking that inexpensive devices might lead to MRIs outside of the 1st world. quick search shows in 2016 USA has 37 mri/1mm people, mexico has 2 mri/1mm people

voicedYoda 7y ago

This is not technical nor attempting to be glib. I've been to the RSNA, am involved in healthcare software in the USA, and seeing what companies like Phillips, GE, et al, spend on floor space at this conference, it seems difficult to imagine these companies yielding their market position for cheaper machines to reduce costs. MRI equipment is huge business (these companies don't bat an eye spending $1,000,000+ for a conference such as the RSNA because this is where they wine and dine and make every hospital exec feel "special" so when it comes time to buy x MRIs, the sale alone will pay back the conference cost 10 fold. These conferences are expensive. The sales pipe is long (and thus expensive). There may be companies creating and selling these, but the heavyweights don't like losing a market opportunity in "their" hospitals. I'd be very reticent to think there will ever be lower costs in the ER for offering said device/service. Please don't get me wrong, I'm excited for limited use machines that can provide the basic information needed at a fraction of the price. I'm very leery of US healthcare institutions making a rational, patient-friendly cost conscious decision.

giarc 7y ago
These won't replace existing MRI machines though. These will be an additional purchase by hospitals or purchased for small, rural hospitals that would never buy an MRI machine in the first place.

tootie 7y ago

I think the real takeaway is that this kind of device is possible and they've given a blueprint. It will now be possible to start engineering new form factors, have scanners that are mobile, or maybe scan dogs and cats.

collyw 7y ago

> The magnet is low-power enough that you could walk within a few feet of it during operation without danger. That was going to be my question. From my current understanding you can't go into the same room as an MRI scanner with any metal in your pockets. The portable nature of this device made me question the safety aspect.