Will MRI replace all other imagining technologies?

[Dock1234]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I mean MRI machines are getting cheaper and faster all the time and they are safer than CT etc. because there is no radiation. So let's say 15-20 years from now, maybe there will be very fast MRI and cheap MRI machines, so why would anyone use anything else? Or am I missing something?

 

[chronicidal]

Disney will probably remain a dominant player in the "imagining technology" space.

 

[DrBowtie]

I mean MRI machines are getting cheaper and faster all the time and they are safer than CT etc. because there is no radiation. So let's say 15-20 years from now, maybe there will be very fast MRI and cheap MRI machines, so why would anyone use anything else? Or am I missing something?

There are applications where CT and even radiographs are superior, specifically with bone and calcification detail. US is cheap and Doppler gives important dynamic information.

 

[Gadofosveset]

No

 

[Over9000]

MRI sucks for bones, so no.

 

[meister]

CTs aren't dangerous.

 

[Baller MD]

I mean MRI machines are getting cheaper and faster all the time and they are safer than CT etc. because there is no radiation. So let's say 15-20 years from now, maybe there will be very fast MRI and cheap MRI machines, so why would anyone use anything else? Or am I missing something?

How are MRIs getting faster?

 

[shark2000]

I mean MRI machines are getting cheaper and faster all the time and they are safer than CT etc. because there is no radiation. So let's say 15-20 years from now, maybe there will be very fast MRI and cheap MRI machines, so why would anyone use anything else? Or am I missing something?

One point that you are missing is the continued advancement in CT technology. Your point is valid only if the CT technology freezes that the level that it is now and MRI continues to grow. What you say is exactly what people used to predict mistakenly in 80s. In 1980s, even some top experts in radiology used to think that CT would be obsolete in 90s and 2000s. The exact opposite happened and CT was the most rapidly growing imaging modality in that timeline. They didn't predict that MDCT technology will revolutionize the world of medical imaging. Right now dual energy CT is a promising technology that may become more popular in the near future. It is another step towards decreasing the dose of CT scan. Also it is good for differentiating between things that are impossible to differentiate on conventional CT by just looking at HU. It is another step towards improving the tissue contrast in CT.

There are lots of other things to consider. As people mentioned here, radiation is not what some pigheaded journalist in NYTimes write about. With new reconstruction algorithm the dose for CT becomes less and less. Also MRI is not as expensive as people say.

Your prediction may come true one day, nobody knows. But saying that why should anyone use anything else is somehow shortsighted. A shoulder Xray can show calcific tendinopathy better than MRI. It is very very hard to detect a renal stone on MRI.

MRI, CT, US and Nucs are 4 different modalities with totally different physics behind them. It is very very hard for one of these modalities to completely replace the other one, though it may push the other modality to the side. For example, CTA chest pretty much has replaced V/Q scan as MOC to work up PE.

 

[maxxor]

How are MRIs getting faster?

Faster sequences, better coils, better acquisition techniques ("spiral" instead of linear acquisition through K-space, better aliasing which allows for multislice simultaneous acquisition), better motion correction... Kawin Setsompop is the man when it comes to rapid MR acquisition. https://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/news/20150714/with-new-techniques-mri-faster-than-ever-before

CT is also improving by leaps and bounds. Dual energy CT and improved reconstruction algorithms have improved soft tissue contrast and decreased both radiation and contrast dose significantly. If you want to see some crazy recon algorithms, look up Synho Do's work.

 

[Moose A Moose]

If anything, CT will be top dog with MRI backing it up.

MR is still just way too expensive for the daily grind.

 

[MadRadLad]

Is MRI one of the harder methods to get good at reading? I always feel so lost when I look at one.

 

[shark2000]

Is MRI one of the harder methods to get good at reading? I always feel so lost when I look at one.

I read an MRI or CT with more confidence than an Xray. If you sit with one of the old chest or bone attending, you will see the art of interpretation of X-rays and will find out how much we miss on plain films.

MRI is one of the harder modalities to get good at, but once you are there you are confident about your interpretation. The exact opposite of Xray and mammo that everybody and their mother think that they can read one but they don't know what they are talking about.

 

[Baller MD]

Faster sequences, better coils, better acquisition techniques ("spiral" instead of linear acquisition through K-space, better aliasing which allows for multislice simultaneous acquisition), better motion correction... Kawin Setsompop is the man when it comes to rapid MR acquisition. https://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/news/20150714/with-new-techniques-mri-faster-than-ever-before

CT is also improving by leaps and bounds. Dual energy CT and improved reconstruction algorithms have improved soft tissue contrast and decreased both radiation and contrast dose significantly. If you want to see some crazy recon algorithms, look up Synho Do's work.

Is faster necessarily better though? Are you worried about it being more of a commodity?

 

[Gadofosveset]

Is faster necessarily better though? Are you worried about it being more of a commodity?

Yes. No.

 

[maxxor]

Just look, with newer generation CT scanners to lower dosage while increasing quality, but MRI has no serious side effects related to increase in field strength. And that's why researchers and clinicians are waiting with open arms for 7T MRI and beyond.
I found a pretty informative article about 7T MR, take a look at it: http://bimedis.com/latest-news/browse/97/7t-sodium-cardiac-mri-may-be-a-game-changer

Not everyone is safe to physically go into a 7T field. Pacemakers are a big reason, but pain pumps and other implantable devices would not be 7T compatible.

 

[greg1184]

MRI has poor spacial resolution and certain metallic devices are incompatible within the magnet.

So no.