Oec 9400

[mehul_25]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Any thoughts on this machine?

 

[Aether2000]

It is built with ancient technology. Mine was built in 1989 and has about the same amount of RAM as my wristwatch. It stores 60 images only so you need some type of alternative image storage system (Medicap works fine). The automatic systems for picture quality work reasonably well as long as there is not an open air interface (eg. caudal ESI lateral view). In that case, one must either lower the beam to eliminate open air thereby placing the target at the very edge of the screen, or use some intense collimation. The generator is one phase which means the machine has to initially come on for about 4-5 seconds of radiation exposure before the APS system finally calculates the correct settings for a patient during the initial exposure or when changing tissue densities significantly on the same patient (eg AP to lateral rotation). My machine had some sort of battery failure and warning for years, but all messages have disappeared now. It was purchased to be a stopgap measure to a better machine but I learned so much about radiation having to make manual adjustments, and the fact it is like the everready bunny, I elected to keep it as a backup. OEC made some very good machines back then. It has been retrofitted with some useless features such as roadmapping but not digital subtraction. I paid around $25K for the machine 4 years ago, not refurbished or serviced in any way. Compared to the new GE or Philips or Ziehm machines, the picture is somewhat grainy but adequate for most lumbar cases, although the quality of the picture is related to the image intensifier and generator, both of which I am certain are original equipment on my machine. Each machine varies in picture quality due to varying wear rates on the generator anode and the image intensifier. The best way to find out what kind of image it has would be to visit the machine and xray yourself.

 

[lobelsteve]

My preference for daily use and for training is 9000, 9400 or Siremobil 2000.
I used a 9800 in private practice for a year (180,000) and it offered me no advantage over the older units as far as visualization except in very large americans (300 + pounds). The downside is that you need a great service contract and an even better relationship with the guy who will fix or maintain your equipment.

 

[mehul_25]

My preference for daily use and for training is 9000, 9400 or Siremobil 2000.
I used a 9800 in private practice for a year (180,000) and it offered me no advantage over the older units as far as visualization except in very large americans (300 + pounds). The downside is that you need a great service contract and an even better relationship with the guy who will fix or maintain your equipment.

would you use this machine with more complicated procedures (ie disco, cesi)?

 

[ampaphb]

It is built with ancient technology. Mine was built in 1989 and has about the same amount of RAM as my wristwatch. It stores 60 images only so you need some type of alternative image storage system (Medicap works fine). The automatic systems for picture quality work reasonably well as long as there is not an open air interface (eg. caudal ESI lateral view). In that case, one must either lower the beam to eliminate open air thereby placing the target at the very edge of the screen, or use some intense collimation. The generator is one phase which means the machine has to initially come on for about 4-5 seconds of radiation exposure before the APS system finally calculates the correct settings for a patient during the initial exposure or when changing tissue densities significantly on the same patient (eg AP to lateral rotation). My machine had some sort of battery failure and warning for years, but all messages have disappeared now. It was purchased to be a stopgap measure to a better machine but I learned so much about radiation having to make manual adjustments, and the fact it is like the everready bunny, I elected to keep it as a backup. OEC made some very good machines back then. It has been retrofitted with some useless features such as roadmapping but not digital subtraction. I paid around $25K for the machine 4 years ago, not refurbished or serviced in any way. Compared to the new GE or Philips or Ziehm machines, the picture is somewhat grainy but adequate for most lumbar cases, although the quality of the picture is related to the image intensifier and generator, both of which I am certain are original equipment on my machine. Each machine varies in picture quality due to varying wear rates on the generator anode and the image intensifier. The best way to find out what kind of image it has would be to visit the machine and xray yourself.

Seems to me that is one more place a sophisticated attorney could possibly go if something were to go wrong in a case.

"Doctor, your primary imaging device is 18 years old, and is, by your own admission, "ancient technology" and provides "somewhat grainy images"; do you believe it is reasonable to conclude that a substandard outcome might well have been contributed to by your use of substandard equipment?"

Physicians as a general rule are penny-wise and pound foolish - one bad outcome will cost you FAR more in a malpractice settlement or judgment and resultant increased malpractice rates than the LIST PRICE lobelsteve disingenuously quoted for a 9800 (like with buying a car, no one ever pays list for these devices)

 

[lobelsteve]

would you use this machine with more complicated procedures (ie disco, cesi)?

I've had no problem performing any procedure based on the images obtained from these units. I had some added time setting up the machines for cervical cross table laterals and caudal laterals for the reasons mentioned by Algos.

As far as what AMPHB? wrote in paying list vs retail- The $180k price was the actual price paid for a brand new 9800 in 2005 by a former employer.

 

[lonelobo]

We purchased 9900 for 125K, last March

 

[Mister Mxyzptlk]

I have a Siremobil Compact Iso-L. Paid about $70k for it 5 years ago. The Siemens lease terms were very competitive. No whistles and bells, just great images.

 

[Aether2000]

Since I am far older than my OEC9400, it would be difficult to argue the machine was more obselete than I am, therefore I don't worry about the litigation argument. Many hospitals use fluoro imaging machines that are also equally old without fear of litigation due to the antiquity of their machines.
I have seen many fluoro techs operating the most modern machines but haven't a clue about their operation. That scares me far more than my quite adequate image with a 9400, and being able to charge reasonable prices for my services rather than jacking up office E&M and procedure charges into the stratosphere in order to afford the greatest latest best of everything. $70-90K are to me reasonable prices but at the time I acquired my machine, I was unaware new machines could be acquired for such. The quotes I received at the time were $135K for a new OEC.