|
Magnetic
Resonance -
Technology
Information
Portal |
Welcome to MRI Technology • |
|
|
 | Info
Sheets |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 | Out-
side |
| | | | |
|
| | | | | |
| Result: Searchterm 'Image Quality'
found in 14 messages |
| Result Pages: 1 2 [3] |
More Results:  Database (42) News Service (17) Resources (5) |
|
|
John Dowling
Tue. 9 May.06,
22:36
[Start of:
'Omniscan Distribution Rate'
1 Reply]
 Category:
Contrast Agents
|
| Omniscan Distribution Rate |
I was told by the GE rep that Omniscan has a faster distribution rate, that should lend itself to better images/application to specific technologies. Is this claim valid? This is the first I've heard of this type "spin" on contrast agents. <pun intended>
In my experience, I have not seen much difference in image quality from various contrast agents. Any thoughts or experiences are appreciated.
|
|  View the whole thread | Reply to this thread
(login or register first) | |
Jadwiga kudynska
Wed. 8 Mar.06,
21:24
[Start of:
'flat board/insert'
1 Reply]
Category:
Devices, Scanner, Machines
|
| flat board/insert |
Good Day Everyone:
Our Imaging Canter has a new MRI unit (Philips 1.5 T Achieva) that we would
like to use for Radiation Oncology patients. The carbon fibre flat table top
as we use in CT effects the MRI image quality. A few companies I have
contacted do not know who makes flat table tops for MRI.
I would appreciate a note from current Radiation Oncology MRI users if they
know the manufacturer of proper flat tops or if they have found a way
"around" the problem.
|
| | View the whole thread | Reply to this thread
(login or register first) | |
Tomas Randell
Mon. 20 Jun.05,
19:38
[Reply (1 of 3) to:
'Metalic particles into the cornea'
started by: 'Jorge Cazal'
on Mon. 13 Jun.05]
Category:
Safety
|
| Metalic particles into the cornea |
For my personal opinion, it is not to expect that these microscopic steel particles are a contraindication for an MRI of the head. An injury of the patient by dislocation or
torque presents not a real risk because of the small size.
The possibility of heating is minimal and can be additional lowered by reducing the SAR. Artifacts may reduce the image quality a little, but diagnostic brain imaging is certainly possible. The use of a mid or low field MRI machine will also reduce any risks.
Hope this will help.
|
| | View the whole thread | | |
William Flemming
Tue. 29 Mar.05,
02:49
[Reply (1 of 2) to:
'MR image of an eye'
started by: 'Reader Mail '
on Tue. 14 Dec.04]
Category:
Applications and Examinations
|
| MR image of an eye |
Depending on the sequence and the field strength there can be artifacts that look like eye movement and are difficult to separate. To avoid eye movement should the patient not only close the eyes or fix a point, but also with closed eyes think about not to move the eyes.
Other artifacts (e.g. ghosting) can be reduced with fat suppression, reduction of the water fat shift, T1 with a long TE (to reduce the brightness of fat), and/or a higher matrix.
Also the perfect positioning of the coil and a homogeneity correction will improve the image quality. I do not know a post processing program that removes those artifacts.
Regards
Bill
|
| | View the whole thread | |
| |
| | Result Pages : 1 2 [3] | |
|
| |
 | Look
Ups |
| |
|
MR-TIP.com uses cookies! By browsing MR-TIP.com, you agree to our use of cookies. | | | [last update: 2024-02-26 03:41:00] |
|
|
bottom
top
