4 ms·

Bad URL. https://www.cea.fr/english/Pages/News/world-premiere-living-brain-imaged-with-unrivaled-clarity-thanks-to-world-most-powerful-MRI-machine.aspx https:/

• chasil 3y ago
  Viewing this image separately reveals higher resolution. https://www.cea.fr/english/PublishingImages/Pages/News/world-premiere-living-brain-imaged-with-unrivaled-clarity-thanks-to-world-most-powerful-MRI-machine/differentes-coupes-axiales.jpg https://www.cea.fr/english/PublishingImages/Pages/News/world...
  • p1esk 3y ago
    Oh wow! Imagine how the chances of detecting a tumor increase going from 3T to 11T. I wonder how much the resolution would increase if we went from 11T to say 50T?
    • lostlogin 3y ago
      The limit of detection hasn’t been the hardware for a long time. It’s humans reading the scans and the availability of the scanners. Various groups are chipping away at low field magnets with the aim of improving access, and their results are impressive.
      • p1esk 3y ago
        I don’t get it - the 11T image has vastly more information than 3T image. Are you saying all that extra information is not helpful when trying to detect tiny tumors or clots? Are you a radiologist?
        • landryraccoon 3y ago
          I think they are saying that even with much better MRIs the limiting factor is finding a radiologist to interpret the image, and the costs of treatment.
          • p1esk 3y ago
            I’ve never had a problem finding a radiologist in US and my insurance covered something like 80% of my last MRI. I think I paid ~$300 for it. I would gladly pay double that for a more reliable detection.
        • lostlogin 3y ago
          No, I’m an MR tech. I can do thin slices on a 3T just fine. They don’t usually help, with the standard 3mm providing plenty enough information. We do the odd scan that is 0.5mm slices. If I show a lesion that’s <1mm, will anyone do anything about it? Watchful waiting seems likely. The question is ‘do thinner slices improve diagnostic accuracy?’ I’m sure they do… to a point. A monster of a machine like this will be research based and being doing dti etc at extreme resolution. Not that helpful clinically, very useful to the researchers. Getting more people scanned is much more of a problem than getting more scanning on the same cohort.
        • tokyovigilante 3y ago
          Not OP, but I am a radiologist, and that 3T image is not representative of a state-of-the-art clinical scanner. The 11.7T does have extremely high spatial resolution but contrast resolution is compromised. As others have said the clinical utility of >3T is very dubious, and most real world MR advances in the last 5 years have been AI (DL/ML not generative) reconstruction for lower field strengths. That high a field strength has significant safety concerns, particularly for implants and pacemakers etc.
          • lostlogin 3y ago
            The safety aspect you point to is just so painful. I was looking at a 5T scanner from United Imaging (interesting stories there…). Is there a single implant that’s been tested for these novel magnets? Checking out implants is painful enough at 1.5T and 3T.
  • lostlogin 3y ago
    Weird inhomogeneity in the 3T image (and in the 7T, though less).
  • tsoukase 3y ago
    They seem low quality. At the MRI centers I cooperate with, the first image is like a CT and the 7T is like 3T.