4 ms·
Medicine: first, do no harm. Why not use MRIs since they skip the problem entirely? Don’t say cost or supply. That’s just because CT scans, misguidedly, have
by odyssey7 2y ago
Medicine: first, do no harm.
Why not use MRIs since they skip the problem entirely?
Don’t say cost or supply. That’s just because CT scans, misguidedly, have more demand. More demand for MRIs would unlock savings from scale.
- readthenotes1 2y agoYou can get an ultra fast CT scan and to a video of blood flow through your heart arteries. I never saw that available via MRI.
- itishappy 2y agoCT scans are better in a lot of ways. They're faster, higher resolution, and sensitive to different stuff than MRIs.
- odyssey7 2y agoRadiographer: “MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) creates detailed images of the inside of the body using strong magnetic fields and radio waves, rather than X-rays. MRI is/was the holy grail for medical imaging professionals. Arguably the coolest images come from MRI” https://radiographermedia.substack.com/p/x-ray-vs-ct-vs-mri https://radiographermedia.substack.com/p/x-ray-vs-ct-vs-mri
- itishappy 2y agoThe coolest images come from MRI. Unquestionably.
- qgin 2y agoYou can do a brain CT to detect a stroke in about 5 minutes. An MRI takes 30-60 minutes. Both useful but in emergency medicine you need the speed.
- odyssey7 2y agoDrive more demand for MRIs and they’ll get faster too
- ChocolateGod 2y agoThey'll always be slower than CT scans because physics.
- odyssey7 2y agoIs the theoretical physical speed limit higher or lower than what is relevant for most clinical use cases?
- enjoytheview 2y agoIn my case, I had a lung issue and CT scans are more sensitive to air being where it shouldn't be. At least two of the 5 ct scans could probaly just have been x-rays tho.