 | Info
Sheets |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 | Out-
side |
| | | | |
|
| | | | | |
| Result: Searchterm 'tr'
found in 421 messages |
| Result Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 |
More Results:  Database (1011) News Service (1852) Resources (540) |
|
|
Steven Ford
Thu. 17 Mar.11,
03:16
[Reply (2 of 5) to:
'Building 3d Volumes from MRI DICOM'
started by: 'Robert Patten'
on Thu. 3 Mar.11]
 Category:
General
|
| Building 3d Volumes from MRI DICOM |
In almost all cases, MRI images have a slice thickness far greater than their in-plane resolution, making multiplanar reconstruction meaningless. Also, most MRI images have a gap between the slices, which also renders multiplanar meaningless and impossible (unless you're happy with black bars where the slice gaps exist).
You can look at your images and the slice thickness is on the graphics. the slice gap is usually not displayed, but if you look at the slice location displayed on adjacent slices, and compare to the slice thickness, you can easily compute the slice gap.
The in-place resolution is (approx) the field of view divided by the acquisition matrix, both of which are also printed on the image somewhere.
By the way, if you have the dicom (.dcm) files, there is lots of data that's 'hidden' that you can access with a full featured dicom file editor.
|
|  View the whole thread | | |
Reader Mail
Tue. 8 Mar.11,
18:23
[Reply (12 of 17) to:
'ARMRIT to ARRT pathway - - - HELP'
started by: 'Gerald Del Castillo'
on Fri. 30 Nov.07]
Category:
Organisations
|
| ARMRIT to ARRT pathway - - - HELP |
Kevin Patana, in 2008, asserts that ARMRIT is "not misleading people," which is technically true. There may be imaging centers in one of the regions he mentions (MN) who are hiring ARMRIT certified techs. If anyone who browses this forum is able to demonstrate even one center for which that is true, it would come as a breath of fresh air. MRI School of Minnesota is one program in the Twin Cities area turning out ARMRIT certified techs. Despite hopeful attempts by these graduates, nearly all of us have not found jobs in the field of MRI. Center For Diagnostic Imaging (CDI), St. Paul Radiology, and Regions Hospital have all submitted in writing that they are not considering ARMRIT certification adequate for hire at their centers. One reason they cite is that their techs need to be (RT) in order to be "multi-modality." During my interview with St. Paul Radiology recently, I was courteously informed that I could not be considered a "tech" in the sense they were using in their job description. Scant experience with venipuncture, total unfamiliarity with MRI School Of MN and ARMRIT, and the need for multi-modality techs were the stated reasons in my face-to-face meeting with them.rnOn a positive note, ARMRIT techs are being hired somewhere--and one graduate of the school who was already employed at an imaging center was promoted to MRI tech, although this tech claimed to be "constantly challenged about [his/her] certification" and aptitude in the field. rnOne question leveled to me in my interview at St. Paul Radiology was, "Why didn't you go to Century/Argosy? (The established ARRT diploma vendors in our area.) I found myself ill-prepared to defend the ARMRIT, only referring to ACR certification, which elicited blinking stares. rnOthers have sought to supplement their ARMRIT certification with local X-ray certificate add-ons.rnWe hope that with further education of the public and local imaging centers, techs may 'break in' to the field, making the ARMRIT certificate more recognized and legitimized. At present, however, it serves as a $16,000 rectangle of parchment with one side blank for a grocery list.
|
| | View the whole thread | | |
Elise Gough
Mon. 7 Mar.11,
16:54
[Reply (7 of 8) to:
'6-1.5T MAGNETS, DIFFERING GRADIENTS'
started by: 'Elise Gough'
on Wed. 23 Feb.11]
Category:
Applications and Examinations
|
| 6-1.5T MAGNETS, DIFFERING GRADIENTS |
Thank you for your logical advice. Just spoke with GE apps. "No amount of messing with MR parameters can compensate for weak gradients. Increased gradient strength=decreased echo spacing=less blurring". Coincidently, my DO just emailed me asking what the gradient strength is on the magnet the RADs are complaining about.Just MAYBE they'll upgrade it. I need to visit our sites.The only way I have to check other sites' parameters is importing exams from PACS to my modality console. Tedious, but telling. Again, thankyou for all the help.
Elise Gough RT(R)(CT)(MR)
|
| | View the whole thread | | |
Steven Ford
Mon. 7 Mar.11,
16:07
[Reply (6 of 8) to:
'6-1.5T MAGNETS, DIFFERING GRADIENTS'
started by: 'Elise Gough'
on Wed. 23 Feb.11]
Category:
Applications and Examinations
|
| 6-1.5T MAGNETS, DIFFERING GRADIENTS |
We maintain a lot of magnets. The leading cause of image quality problems is applications related. Nobody can possibly know all the nuances of pulse sequences by various vendors, software levels, etc. I've heard many times that a certain machine is no good, when in fact the sequences are inefficiently set up. Look there first.
Usually the techs welcome good training. If they don't want to be trained, then you have a problem, but it sounds like this issue is caused by other factors.
If there are differences in baseline quality between the machines, then compensate for that by other means. Signal starvation is easily remedied; keep the quality as consistent as you can and let time be the variable, if it comes down to that.
|
| | View the whole thread | | |
Elise Gough
Mon. 7 Mar.11,
15:56
[Reply (5 of 8) to:
'6-1.5T MAGNETS, DIFFERING GRADIENTS'
started by: 'Elise Gough'
on Wed. 23 Feb.11]
Category:
Applications and Examinations
|
| 6-1.5T MAGNETS, DIFFERING GRADIENTS |
Thanks so much for the input. NOBODY in my group seems to have a handle on why images vary in quality from 8 different magnets. I'm being pressed to take position of imaging specialist and thru my own research we have gradient strengths from 50 slew rate up to 120. Radiologists complain neuro stinks on the 50 slew rate 1.5T magnet and it is the most pounded on magnet in our group doing hospital inpatients. So many variables including tech expertise.
Elise Gough RT(R)(CT)(MR)
|
| | View the whole thread | |
| |
| | Result Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 | |
|
| |
 | Look
Ups |
| |
bottom
top
