 | Info
Sheets |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 | Out-
side |
| | | | |
|
| | | | | |
| Result: Searchterm 'MRI'
found in 415 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 |
More Results:  Database (561) News Service (1300) Resources (333) |
|
|
Ahsan khan
Sat. 2 Apr.11,
10:04
[Start of:
'New Member'
2 Replies]
 Category:
General
|
| New Member |
Hi
I am new to this forum. I am working in a private company as a service engineer for general machines. I would like to switch to MRI as my specialised field. Need your advices on my aspect.
how can i start my career with MRI.
looking forward to hear from you all soon !!!!!....
|
|  View the whole thread | Reply to this thread
(login or register first) | |
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 | | |
Steven Ford
Mon. 7 Mar.11,
15:24
[Reply (4 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 |
If some of the system are signal starved, it's most likely not due to gradient field strength and speed, but it can be related to that. Like everything else in MRI, it's complex and interdependent.
You're best advised to talk with the apps specialist from the systems that are under-performing, and learn from them what the bandwidth is, and also check the shim. Is the fat suppression OK, but the signal weak, or is the suppression bad also? Do you get a graphic output of the linear (gradient)shim corrrection on the various systems?
It is well worth the money that they might charge, if it comes to that, in order to optimize the use of the systems and for your own education. If the apps person does not know why the other machine works so well, there should be someone higher up in the organization who can shed some light on your question.
|
| | View the whole thread | | |
Robert Patten
Sat. 5 Mar.11,
14:47
[Reply (1 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 |
Can someone tell me what kind of luck they have had rendering MRIs to 3D. And if there are problems what do you have to do (like no gaps between slices) to get a good quality picture.
|
| | 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 | |
|
| |
 | Look
Ups |
| |
bottom
top
