New MRI Machine

Dear Ocader’s

I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is
now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches
that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to
their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a
stand alone machine?

I look forward to your insights.

Thanks in advance

Kind regards

Colin

Loading

15 thoughts on “New MRI Machine”

  1. OCAD
    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD
    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology
    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
    Case Western Reserve University
    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102
    (216) 844-1542

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

  2. avneesh.chhabra
    I have no COI

    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..
    – most consistent image quality
    – less human intervention- most reproducible
    – less bulky coils
    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker
    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images
    – SMS Dixon is excellent
    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go
    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    EXTERNAL MAIL

    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD
    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology
    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
    Case Western Reserve University
    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102
    (216) 844-1542

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

  3. graemevthompson
    Nothing a 3T can do that a 1.5 with top end gradients and could can’t.
    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G

    Sent from my iPhone

  4. It depends on your practice:

    * If predominately MSK and Neuro – 3T all the way
    * If high volume – 3T all the way
    * If advanced MSK and neuro application (MRN, 3D MRI, quant imaging, DTI) – 3T all the way

    If none of the above, then it may not matter.

    See attached our papers about the value of 3.0 T for MSK:

    * 3T images 4-times faster than 1.5T at baseline
    * Very difficult with 1.5T to get enough SNR for advanced MSK and Neuro applications
    * The effect of gradient performance is over-estimated for most MSK applications. RF coil performance, surface coils, and receiver chain/channel count make a bigger difference -> decision between midlevel and high-end 3T
    * Cost differences between 1.5T and 3.0T have narrowed over time
    * Metal: with advanced metal suppression sequences (e.g., CS SEMAC), almost all cases come out well at 3T.

    We have very few 1.5T left in our fleet, and we don’t miss any.

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 8:42 AM
    Cc: peter.young@uhhospitals.org; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>; avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu

    Nothing a 3T can do that a 1.5 with top end gradients and could can’t.

    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G

    Sent from my iPhone

     I have no COI

    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..

    – most consistent image quality

    – less human intervention- most reproducible

    – less bulky coils

    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker

    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images

    – SMS Dixon is excellent

    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go

    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good

    Best!

    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.

    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery

    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology

    Department of Radiology

    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316

    Office: 214-648-2122

    <http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/> http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology

    

    EXTERNAL MAIL

    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD

    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology

    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center

    Case Western Reserve University

    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102

    (216) 844-1542

    _____

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin
    2021-InvRad-The-Value-of-3-Tesla-Field-Strength-for-Musculoskeletal-MRI.pdf
    2021-AJR-Rapid-Musculoskeletal-MRI-in-2021-Value-and-Optimized-Use-of-Widely-Accessible-Techniques.pdf
    2021-AJR-Rapid-Musculoskeletal-MRI-in-2021-Clinical-Application-of-Advanced-Accelerated-Techniques.pdf

  5. avneesh.chhabra
    Great points!

    We are doing isotropic 3D capri space on newer 1.5T for joints- sola etc. with similar quality as 3T in 6 min

    The issue is vendors wont bring newer enhancements on 1.5T as fast as 3T otherwise people wont buy 3T

    Its like MR spectroscopy wasnt made available by siemens on 1T for a while as 1.5T wouldn’t sell in 1997-2000 time frame. Although, 1 T was the most homogeneous magnet and required v little shimming.

    The guy who developed cyclotron was giving a futuristic talk and said MRI magnet will be in everyone’s house as magnetic energy is cheap -in less than 20 years

    We are buying a high end 1.5T Siemens for our offsite sports practice. I hope to get compressed sense on that magnet so that we can do 3-D in 3 minutes. Our surgeons love 3D for preop planning.

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    It depends on your practice:

    * If predominately MSK and Neuro – 3T all the way
    * If high volume – 3T all the way
    * If advanced MSK and neuro application (MRN, 3D MRI, quant imaging, DTI) – 3T all the way

    If none of the above, then it may not matter.

    See attached our papers about the value of 3.0 T for MSK:

    * 3T images 4-times faster than 1.5T at baseline
    * Very difficult with 1.5T to get enough SNR for advanced MSK and Neuro applications
    * The effect of gradient performance is over-estimated for most MSK applications. RF coil performance, surface coils, and receiver chain/channel count make a bigger difference -> decision between midlevel and high-end 3T
    * Cost differences between 1.5T and 3.0T have narrowed over time
    * Metal: with advanced metal suppression sequences (e.g., CS SEMAC), almost all cases come out well at 3T.

    We have very few 1.5T left in our fleet, and we don’t miss any.

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 8:42 AM
    Cc: peter.young@uhhospitals.org; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>; avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu

    Nothing a 3T can do that a 1.5 with top end gradients and could can’t.
    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G
    Sent from my iPhone

     I have no COI

    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..
    – most consistent image quality
    – less human intervention- most reproducible
    – less bulky coils
    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker
    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images
    – SMS Dixon is excellent
    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go
    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    EXTERNAL MAIL

    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD
    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology
    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
    Case Western Reserve University
    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102
    (216) 844-1542

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

  6. I agree with all the comments.
    All the vendors’ machines work – GE is very good, but Siemens is best
    overall.
    For MSK, getting a full range of top end surface coils is absolutely
    crucial and is more important than tesla or gradient strength.
    If you only have 1 MRI, and it is a busy hospital setting with lots of
    in-patients, I would get 1.5T. If the facility had 4 MRIs then I would get
    one 1.5T and three 3T.

    Cheers,

    Rob

    On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 7:44 AM Avneesh Chhabra < Avneesh.Chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu> wrote:

  7. All great points.

    Another consideration is that many MR conditional devices have different specifications for 1.5T and 3T. We scan a lot of patients with these devices and this can sometimes limit the studies that can be done with 3T. Especially if you are trying to perform more complicated studies.

    Best,
    Kevin

  8. Great discussions but I’m surprised no one brought up the Siemens Low Field MRIs. Siemens has a 0.55T MR that uses deep learning to significantly improve image quality. The additional benefit is that these costs are much lower w 0.55T at about $850,000 versus twice that for the 1.5T (approx costs that have been quoted) Maintenance costs are supposedly lower too. It doesn’t have the bells and whistles to make the surgeons happy and likely not a replacement for the 3T outpatient scanners but perhaps good enough for inpatient/ED workflow with a wider bore (80cm) I’ve only analyzed demo cases at RSNA but would love to hear if anyone has used it in practice.

    More details here:

    [Image.jpeg]

    http://www.magnetomworld.siemens-healthineers.com/hot-topics/lower-field-mri

    Warmly,

    Ajay

    Ajay Kohli, MD

    Assistant Professor

    Departments of Radiology and Orthopaedic Surgery

    UTSouthwestern Medical Center

    Deputy Medical Informatics Officer, Parkland Enterprise

    Cell: 630.677.4534

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 9:52 AM
    Cc: Jan Fritz <janfritz777@gmail.com>; graemevthompson@gmail.com <graemevthompson@gmail.com>; doccolin@mweb.co.za <doccolin@mweb.co.za>; peter.young@uhhospitals.org <peter.young@uhhospitals.org>; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>

    I agree with all the comments.
    All the vendors’ machines work – GE is very good, but Siemens is best overall.
    For MSK, getting a full range of top end surface coils is absolutely crucial and is more important than tesla or gradient strength.
    If you only have 1 MRI, and it is a busy hospital setting with lots of in-patients, I would get 1.5T. If the facility had 4 MRIs then I would get one 1.5T and three 3T.

    Cheers,

    Rob

    Great points!

    We are doing isotropic 3D capri space on newer 1.5T for joints- sola etc. with similar quality as 3T in 6 min

    The issue is vendors wont bring newer enhancements on 1.5T as fast as 3T otherwise people wont buy 3T

    Its like MR spectroscopy wasnt made available by siemens on 1T for a while as 1.5T wouldn’t sell in 1997-2000 time frame. Although, 1 T was the most homogeneous magnet and required v little shimming.

    The guy who developed cyclotron was giving a futuristic talk and said MRI magnet will be in everyone’s house as magnetic energy is cheap -in less than 20 years

    We are buying a high end 1.5T Siemens for our offsite sports practice. I hope to get compressed sense on that magnet so that we can do 3-D in 3 minutes. Our surgeons love 3D for preop planning.

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    It depends on your practice:

    * If predominately MSK and Neuro – 3T all the way
    * If high volume – 3T all the way
    * If advanced MSK and neuro application (MRN, 3D MRI, quant imaging, DTI) – 3T all the way

    If none of the above, then it may not matter.

    See attached our papers about the value of 3.0 T for MSK:

    * 3T images 4-times faster than 1.5T at baseline
    * Very difficult with 1.5T to get enough SNR for advanced MSK and Neuro applications
    * The effect of gradient performance is over-estimated for most MSK applications. RF coil performance, surface coils, and receiver chain/channel count make a bigger difference -> decision between midlevel and high-end 3T
    * Cost differences between 1.5T and 3.0T have narrowed over time
    * Metal: with advanced metal suppression sequences (e.g., CS SEMAC), almost all cases come out well at 3T.

    We have very few 1.5T left in our fleet, and we don’t miss any.

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 8:42 AM
    Cc: peter.young@uhhospitals.org<mailto:peter.young@uhhospitals.org>; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com<mailto:ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>>; avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu<mailto:avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu>

    Nothing a 3T can do that a 1.5 with top end gradients and could can’t.
    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G
    Sent from my iPhone

     I have no COI

    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..
    – most consistent image quality
    – less human intervention- most reproducible
    – less bulky coils
    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker
    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images
    – SMS Dixon is excellent
    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go
    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    EXTERNAL MAIL

    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD
    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology
    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
    Case Western Reserve University
    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102
    (216) 844-1542

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

    [gallery]

  9. Hi All.

    I work on 1.5T GE, 3T Siemens, 3T Phillips, 3T GE.

    The Siemens and the Philips are both excellent.

    1.5 T GE is excellent.

    3T GE not in the same league as Siemens or Philips.I would avoid, even if cheaper.

    Would only have a 1.5T MRI for inside hospital, if only one magnet.

    I am not sure our referrers would tolerate low field images.

    Regards

    Daniel

    Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2022 7:49 AM
    Cc: Jan Fritz <janfritz777@gmail.com>; graemevthompson@gmail.com; doccolin@mweb.co.za; peter.young@uhhospitals.org; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>

    Great discussions but I’m surprised no one brought up the Siemens Low Field MRIs. Siemens has a 0.55T MR that uses deep learning to significantly improve image quality. The additional benefit is that these costs are much lower w 0.55T at about $850,000 versus twice that for the 1.5T (approx costs that have been quoted) Maintenance costs are supposedly lower too. It doesn’t have the bells and whistles to make the surgeons happy and likely not a replacement for the 3T outpatient scanners but perhaps good enough for inpatient/ED workflow with a wider bore (80cm) I’ve only analyzed demo cases at RSNA but would love to hear if anyone has used it in practice.

    More details here:

    http://www.magnetomworld.siemens-healthineers.com/hot-topics/lower-field-mri

    Warmly,

    Ajay

    Ajay Kohli, MD

    Assistant Professor

    Departments of Radiology and Orthopaedic Surgery

    UTSouthwestern Medical Center

    Deputy Medical Informatics Officer, Parkland Enterprise

    Cell: 630.677.4534

    _____

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 9:52 AM
    Cc: Jan Fritz <janfritz777@gmail.com <mailto:janfritz777@gmail.com> >; graemevthompson@gmail.com <mailto:graemevthompson@gmail.com> <graemevthompson@gmail.com <mailto:graemevthompson@gmail.com> >; doccolin@mweb.co.za <mailto:doccolin@mweb.co.za> <doccolin@mweb.co.za <mailto:doccolin@mweb.co.za> >; peter.young@uhhospitals.org <mailto:peter.young@uhhospitals.org> <peter.young@uhhospitals.org <mailto:peter.young@uhhospitals.org> >; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com <mailto:ocad-msk@googlegroups.com> >

    I agree with all the comments.

    All the vendors’ machines work – GE is very good, but Siemens is best overall.

    For MSK, getting a full range of top end surface coils is absolutely crucial and is more important than tesla or gradient strength.

    If you only have 1 MRI, and it is a busy hospital setting with lots of in-patients, I would get 1.5T. If the facility had 4 MRIs then I would get one 1.5T and three 3T.

    Cheers,

    Rob

    Great points!

    We are doing isotropic 3D capri space on newer 1.5T for joints- sola etc. with similar quality as 3T in 6 min

    The issue is vendors wont bring newer enhancements on 1.5T as fast as 3T otherwise people wont buy 3T

    Its like MR spectroscopy wasnt made available by siemens on 1T for a while as 1.5T wouldn’t sell in 1997-2000 time frame. Although, 1 T was the most homogeneous magnet and required v little shimming.

    The guy who developed cyclotron was giving a futuristic talk and said MRI magnet will be in everyone’s house as magnetic energy is cheap -in less than 20 years

    We are buying a high end 1.5T Siemens for our offsite sports practice. I hope to get compressed sense on that magnet so that we can do 3-D in 3 minutes. Our surgeons love 3D for preop planning.

    Best!

    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.

    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery

    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology

    Department of Radiology

    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316

    Office: 214-648-2122

    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology <http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    

    It depends on your practice:

    * If predominately MSK and Neuro – 3T all the way
    * If high volume – 3T all the way
    * If advanced MSK and neuro application (MRN, 3D MRI, quant imaging, DTI) – 3T all the way

    If none of the above, then it may not matter.

    See attached our papers about the value of 3.0 T for MSK:

    * 3T images 4-times faster than 1.5T at baseline
    * Very difficult with 1.5T to get enough SNR for advanced MSK and Neuro applications
    * The effect of gradient performance is over-estimated for most MSK applications. RF coil performance, surface coils, and receiver chain/channel count make a bigger difference -> decision between midlevel and high-end 3T
    * Cost differences between 1.5T and 3.0T have narrowed over time
    * Metal: with advanced metal suppression sequences (e.g., CS SEMAC), almost all cases come out well at 3T.

    We have very few 1.5T left in our fleet, and we don’t miss any.

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 8:42 AM
    Cc: peter.young@uhhospitals.org <mailto:peter.young@uhhospitals.org> ; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com <mailto:ocad-msk@googlegroups.com> >; avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu <mailto:avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu>

    Nothing a 3T can do that a 1.5 with top end gradients and could can’t.

    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G

    Sent from my iPhone

     I have no COI

    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..

    – most consistent image quality

    – less human intervention- most reproducible

    – less bulky coils

    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker

    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images

    – SMS Dixon is excellent

    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go

    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good

    Best!

    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.

    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery

    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology

    Department of Radiology

    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316

    Office: 214-648-2122

    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology <http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    

    EXTERNAL MAIL

    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD

    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology

    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center

    Case Western Reserve University

    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102

    (216) 844-1542

    _____

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

    [gallery]

  10. Many good points brought up on both sides in this discussion.

    For 1.5T, I agree with Siemens > GE > Philips > other (Hitachi way down the
    list). For 3T, I agree with Siemens > GE. No experience with 3T Philips.

    For metal artifact, Siemens SEMAC is better than Siemens WARP for slice
    distortion and overall metal artifact reduction but worse for blurring. GE
    MAVRIC also provides very good metal artifact reduction. Even with these
    multispectral techniques, if doing arthroplasty MRI routinely, 1.5T is
    better than 3T. If only occasionally, maybe not a big issue.

    You can easily obtain images as high spatial resolution with 1.5T as most
    people are getting with 3T with good contrast resolution.

    True, MRI safety profile is better with 1.5T if you will do any cases on
    patients with non conditional pacemakers.

    The extra available signal at 3T is very nice for doing acceleration
    techniques that drop SNR or amping up the spatial resolution.

    Higher spatial resolution can make tissue mapping techniques more accurate,
    advantage 3T on that.

    3T sells well – good for advertising.

    Will your hospital be buying new or refurbished? Then you may be deciding
    between a “lower level” new (like Siemens Lumina) and a slightly older
    model refurb (like Siemens Skyra).

    Siemens 3T Lumina has significantly lower peak gradient amplitude but the
    same slew rate as Siemens Vida (36/200 vs 60/200). Some examples of where
    the difference may be visible include high BW imaging like joint
    replacement cases, or if you do diffusion, perfusion, or UTE imaging.
    Mostly for day to day MSK work you won’t see a difference on the images
    with those gradients having the same slew rate.

    Siemens Lumina uses SMS on 2D joint imaging, compressed sense on 3D.

    Make sure you go through the documents so that you know which coils will be
    part of the deal, and ask for the ones you need. Sometimes the people in
    charge of purchasing don’t adequately consider the MSK studies that will
    need to be performed.

    -Scot

    On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 11:32 PM Dr Colin Turner <doccolin@mweb.co.za>
    wrote:

  11. That’s another very interesting discussion!

    Check out our SSR poster on lumbar spine MRI at 0.55T versus 1.T b Dr. Samim:

    An an article about metal reduction MRI at 0.55T versus 1.5T using high-BW, SEMAC, and Compressed Sensing (CS) SEMAC hot off the press here by Dr. Khodarahmi: 1drv.ms/b/s!AlETWJQhV6-YtfF0nBIxvnbQecnktg

    0.55T offers some intriguing opportunities (metal implants without and with, excellent T1 marrow contrast, AI/DL, devices as Kevin pointed out) and challenges for MSK (SNR, fluid brightness, spectral fat suppression, coils, acquisition time).

    Transmission and signal processing have improved, but 0.55T is 0.55T and some physics don’t change. 0.55T requires about 4-5 times longer acquisition times than 1.5T (with adequately similar coils).

    Who remembers 0.2T Open and Concerto scannrs? I did my thesis with those scanners before the millennium.

    The above 4-sequence spine porotocol is 6 min @ 1.5T and 25 min @ 0.55T. The spine work well. But peripheral joints right now need dedicated coils, like this one here by Dr. Want and Brown:

    It has its place, e.g. for sites where total cost of ownership or space of 1.5T and 3.0T systems is prohibitive. It will be interesting to see how it fits into high volume practices.

    Looking forward “see” everyone in San Diego!

    Jan

    ———————————-
    Jan Fritz, M.D., P.D., R.M.S.K.
    Associate Professor of Radiology
    Division Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology

    New York University Langone Health
    Grossman School of Medicine
    Department of Radiology
    660 1st Ave, 3rd Floor, Rm 313
    New York, NY 10016
    Phone: 646-501-0328
    Email: jan.fritz@nyulangone.org

    ———————————-

    Great discussions but I’m surprised no one brought up the Siemens Low Field MRIs. Siemens has a 0.55T MR that uses deep learning to significantly improve image quality. The additional benefit is that these costs are much lower w 0.55T at about $850,000 versus twice that for the 1.5T (approx costs that have been quoted) Maintenance costs are supposedly lower too. It doesn’t have the bells and whistles to make the surgeons happy and likely not a replacement for the 3T outpatient scanners but perhaps good enough for inpatient/ED workflow with a wider bore (80cm) I’ve only analyzed demo cases at RSNA but would love to hear if anyone has used it in practice.

    More details here:

    http://www.magnetomworld.siemens-healthineers.com/hot-topics/lower-field-mri

    Warmly, Ajay Ajay Kohli, MD
    Assistant Professor
    Departments of Radiology and Orthopaedic Surgery
    UTSouthwestern Medical Center
    Deputy Medical Informatics Officer, Parkland Enterprise Cell: 630.677.4534

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 9:52 AM
    Cc: Jan Fritz <janfritz777@gmail.com>; graemevthompson@gmail.com <graemevthompson@gmail.com>; doccolin@mweb.co.za <doccolin@mweb.co.za>; peter.young@uhhospitals.org <peter.young@uhhospitals.org>; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>
    I agree with all the comments.
    All the vendors’ machines work – GE is very good, but Siemens is best overall.
    For MSK, getting a full range of top end surface coils is absolutely crucial and is more important than tesla or gradient strength.
    If you only have 1 MRI, and it is a busy hospital setting with lots of in-patients, I would get 1.5T. If the facility had 4 MRIs then I would get one 1.5T and three 3T.

    Cheers,

    Rob

    Great points!
    We are doing isotropic 3D capri space on newer 1.5T for joints- sola etc. with similar quality as 3T in 6 min

    The issue is vendors wont bring newer enhancements on 1.5T as fast as 3T otherwise people wont buy 3T

    Its like MR spectroscopy wasnt made available by siemens on 1T for a while as 1.5T wouldn’t sell in 1997-2000 time frame. Although, 1 T was the most homogeneous magnet and required v little shimming.

    The guy who developed cyclotron was giving a futuristic talk and said MRI magnet will be in everyone’s house as magnetic energy is cheap -in less than 20 years

    We are buying a high end 1.5T Siemens for our offsite sports practice. I hope to get compressed sense on that magnet so that we can do 3-D in 3 minutes. Our surgeons love 3D for preop planning.

    Best! AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A. Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology Department of Radiology 5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316 Office: 214-648-2122 http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology

     It depends on your practice: If predominately MSK and Neuro – 3T all the way If high volume – 3T all the way If advanced MSK and neuro application (MRN, 3D MRI, quant imaging, DTI) – 3T all the way If none of the above, then it may not matter. See attached our papers about the value of 3.0 T for MSK: 3T images 4-times faster than 1.5T at baseline Very difficult with 1.5T to get enough SNR for advanced MSK and Neuro applications The effect of gradient performance is over-estimated for most MSK applications. RF coil performance, surface coils, and receiver chain/channel count make a bigger difference -> decision between midlevel and high-end 3T Cost differences between 1.5T and 3.0T have narrowed over time Metal: with advanced metal suppression sequences (e.g., CS SEMAC), almost all cases come out well at 3T. We have very few 1.5T left in our fleet, and we don’t miss any. From: ocad-msk@googlegroups.com < ocad-msk@googlegroups.com > On Behalf Of Graeme Thompson
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 8:42 AM
    Cc: peter.young@uhhospitals.org ; OCAD_MSK < ocad-msk@googlegroups.com >; avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu
    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G Sent from my iPhone

     I have no COI
    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..
    – most consistent image quality
    – less human intervention- most reproducible
    – less bulky coils
    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker
    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images
    – SMS Dixon is excellent
    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go
    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good
    Best! AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A. Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology Department of Radiology 5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316 Office: 214-648-2122 http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology

     EXTERNAL MAIL Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting. Been there, done that. pete Peter C. Young, MD
    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
    Case Western Reserve University
    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102
    (216) 844-1542

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM
    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍
    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. We will be initially looking at 3 new machines. Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc. Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine? I look forward to your insights. Thanks in advance Kind regards Colin —
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “OCAD MSK” group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocad-msk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
    To view this discussion on the web visit groups.google.com/d/msgid/ocad-msk/002a01d83511%24bcb38f30%24361aad90%24%40mweb.co.za .
    Visit us at http://www.UHhospitals.org .

    The enclosed information is STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL and is intended for the
    use of the addressee only. University Hospitals and its affiliates disclaim
    any responsibility for unauthorized disclosure of this information to anyone
    other than the addressee.

    Federal and Ohio law protect patient medical information, including
    psychiatric_disorders, (H.I.V) test results, A.I.Ds-related conditions,
    alcohol, and/or drug_dependence or abuse disclosed in this email. Federal
    regulation (42 CFR Part 2) and Ohio Revised Code section 5122.31 and
    3701.243 prohibit disclosure of this information without the specific
    written consent of the person to whom it pertains, or as otherwise permitted
    by law. —
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “OCAD MSK” group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocad-msk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
    To view this discussion on the web visit groups.google.com/d/msgid/ocad-msk/24ce124ff67c443e8620a317c18890ea%40UHhospitals.org . CAUTION: This email originated from outside UTSW. Please be cautious of links or attachments, and validate the sender’s email address before replying.
    UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today. —
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “OCAD MSK” group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocad-msk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
    To view this discussion on the web visit groups.google.com/d/msgid/ocad-msk/D140E627-0B5D-4688-A03B-0F25E04EBABD%40utsouthwestern.edu . —
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “OCAD MSK” group.
    To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ocad-msk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
    To view this discussion on the web visit groups.google.com/d/msgid/ocad-msk/706D6666-48A2-49ED-83F3-9A4F85BFAA32%40gmail.com .

    [gallery]

  12. Congratulations on the poster!

    0.5T has its role..
    – claustrophobic patients with 89cm more open bore
    – low cost of operation
    – For MSK- black structures look better. Intermeniscal/obl meniscomeniscal lig / plica / synachiae, etc m. are very well seen in the background of good fat contrast and marrow fat contrast
    -Read a lot of arthrograms on 0.5T as that would provide the needed contrast. I presume newer 0.5T would do fs image in 5 min

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    That’s another very interesting discussion!

    Check out our SSR poster on lumbar spine MRI at 0.55T versus 1.5T by Dr. Samim:

    //ocadmsk.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/E0EE276A@app.preside.io_-1.jpg“/>
    //ocadmsk.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/5E77F836@app.preside.io_-1.jpg“/>

    An an article about metal reduction MRI at 0.55T versus 1.5T using high-BW, SEMAC, and Compressed Sensing (CS) SEMAC hot off the press here by Dr. Khodarahmi: 1drv.ms/b/s!AlETWJQhV6-YtfF0nBIxvnbQecnktg

    0.55T offers some intriguing opportunities (metal implants without and with, excellent T1 marrow contrast, AI/DL, devices as Kevin pointed out) and challenges for MSK (SNR, fluid brightness, spectral fat suppression, coils, acquisition time).

    Transmission and signal processing have improved, but 0.55T is 0.55T and some physics don’t change. 0.55T requires about 4-5 times longer acquisition times than 1.5T (with adequately similar coils).

    Who remembers 0.2T Open and Concerto scanners? I did my thesis with those scanners before the millennium.

    The above 4-sequence spine porotocol is 6 min @ 1.5T and 25 min @ 0.55T. The spine work well. But peripheral joints right now need dedicated coils, like this one here by Dr. Want and Brown:

    //ocadmsk.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/679CF33F@app.preside.io_-1.jpg“/>

    It has its place, e.g. for sites where total cost of ownership or space of 1.5T and 3.0T systems is prohibitive. It will be interesting to see how it fits into high volume practices.

    Looking forward “see” everyone in San Diego!

    Jan

    ———————————-

    Jan Fritz, M.D., P.D., R.M.S.K.
    Associate Professor of Radiology
    Division Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology

    New York University Langone Health
    Grossman School of Medicine
    Department of Radiology
    660 1st Ave, 3rd Floor, Rm 313
    New York, NY 10016
    Phone: 646-501-0328
    Email: jan.fritz@nyulangone.org

    ———————————-

    Great discussions but I’m surprised no one brought up the Siemens Low Field MRIs. Siemens has a 0.55T MR that uses deep learning to significantly improve image quality. The additional benefit is that these costs are much lower w 0.55T at about $850,000 versus twice that for the 1.5T (approx costs that have been quoted) Maintenance costs are supposedly lower too. It doesn’t have the bells and whistles to make the surgeons happy and likely not a replacement for the 3T outpatient scanners but perhaps good enough for inpatient/ED workflow with a wider bore (80cm) I’ve only analyzed demo cases at RSNA but would love to hear if anyone has used it in practice.

    More details here:

    [Image.jpeg]

    http://www.magnetomworld.siemens-healthineers.com/hot-topics/lower-field-mri

    Warmly,

    Ajay

    Ajay Kohli, MD

    Assistant Professor

    Departments of Radiology and Orthopaedic Surgery

    UTSouthwestern Medical Center

    Deputy Medical Informatics Officer, Parkland Enterprise

    Cell: 630.677.4534

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 9:52 AM
    Cc: Jan Fritz <janfritz777@gmail.com>; graemevthompson@gmail.com <graemevthompson@gmail.com>; doccolin@mweb.co.za <doccolin@mweb.co.za>; peter.young@uhhospitals.org <peter.young@uhhospitals.org>; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>

    I agree with all the comments.
    All the vendors’ machines work – GE is very good, but Siemens is best overall.
    For MSK, getting a full range of top end surface coils is absolutely crucial and is more important than tesla or gradient strength.
    If you only have 1 MRI, and it is a busy hospital setting with lots of in-patients, I would get 1.5T. If the facility had 4 MRIs then I would get one 1.5T and three 3T.

    Cheers,

    Rob

    Great points!

    We are doing isotropic 3D capri space on newer 1.5T for joints- sola etc. with similar quality as 3T in 6 min

    The issue is vendors wont bring newer enhancements on 1.5T as fast as 3T otherwise people wont buy 3T

    Its like MR spectroscopy wasnt made available by siemens on 1T for a while as 1.5T wouldn’t sell in 1997-2000 time frame. Although, 1 T was the most homogeneous magnet and required v little shimming.

    The guy who developed cyclotron was giving a futuristic talk and said MRI magnet will be in everyone’s house as magnetic energy is cheap -in less than 20 years

    We are buying a high end 1.5T Siemens for our offsite sports practice. I hope to get compressed sense on that magnet so that we can do 3-D in 3 minutes. Our surgeons love 3D for preop planning.

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    It depends on your practice:

    * If predominately MSK and Neuro – 3T all the way
    * If high volume – 3T all the way
    * If advanced MSK and neuro application (MRN, 3D MRI, quant imaging, DTI) – 3T all the way

    If none of the above, then it may not matter.

    See attached our papers about the value of 3.0 T for MSK:

    * 3T images 4-times faster than 1.5T at baseline
    * Very difficult with 1.5T to get enough SNR for advanced MSK and Neuro applications
    * The effect of gradient performance is over-estimated for most MSK applications. RF coil performance, surface coils, and receiver chain/channel count make a bigger difference -> decision between midlevel and high-end 3T
    * Cost differences between 1.5T and 3.0T have narrowed over time
    * Metal: with advanced metal suppression sequences (e.g., CS SEMAC), almost all cases come out well at 3T.

    We have very few 1.5T left in our fleet, and we don’t miss any.

    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 8:42 AM
    Cc: peter.young@uhhospitals.org<mailto:peter.young@uhhospitals.org>; OCAD_MSK <ocad-msk@googlegroups.com<mailto:ocad-msk@googlegroups.com>>;avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu<mailto:avneesh.chhabra@utsouthwestern.edu>

    Nothing a 3T can do that a 1.5 with top end gradients and could can’t.
    Siemens is the only MRI for me.

    G
    Sent from my iPhone

     I have no COI

    In my opinion- Siemens is the best for multiple reasons..
    – most consistent image quality
    – less human intervention- most reproducible
    – less bulky coils
    – industry leader therefore more advancements come quicker
    – current compressed sense provides 3 min 3D scans- beautiful images
    – SMS Dixon is excellent
    – resolve/motion corrected beautiful moci DWI and DTI scans and T2 / T1 VIBE Dixon images

    There is a reason that it is more expensive …

    Philips is a more open platform- if you want your magnet to be your lab- go for Philips- cheaper magnet, bulkier coils, mostly copies other vendors for advancements which tend to arrive later; requires a lot of maintainance and is a headache for our techs due to lack of reproducibility and inconsistent image quality. I have to intervene frequently to teach them and get a good image quality

    Thats been my experience working with both vendors and their high-end advancements

    GE is coming back after a hiatus but has a longer way to go
    Their air coil is great!!

    Toshiba- gave us a presentation recently and on the face of it, it looked good

    But I would like to stay with industry leader and focus on more patient care and outcomes rather than spend my time to make the routine images look good

    Best!
    AC

    Avneesh Chhabra, M.D. M.B.A.
    Professor, Radiology & Orthopedic Surgery
    Chief, Musculoskeletal Radiology
    Department of Radiology
    5323 Harry Hines, Blvd. Dallas, Tx-75390-9316
    Office: 214-648-2122
    http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/radiology<http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/education/medical-school/departments/radiology/>

    
    EXTERNAL MAIL

    Never have a 3T as the *only* MRI for an inpatient hospital setting.

    Been there, done that.

    pete

    Peter C. Young, MD
    Section Head, Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology
    University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
    Case Western Reserve University
    11100 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, OH 44102
    (216) 844-1542

    ________________________________
    Sent: Friday, March 11, 2022 1:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon. ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

  13. Wow so many responses with so many great points and valuable insight.

    It’s really wonderful to be able to receive so many opinions in such a short space of time.

    Overall I think the Siemens 1.5T will probably be the best fit for us so will have to discuss with other relevant parties in our group going forward.

    Thank you all for your advice and input.

    Kind regards

    Colin

    Sent: 11 March 2022 08:32 AM

    Dear Ocader’s

    I work in a hospital with one MRI machine (currently Philips 1.5T which is now nearing end of life) but am also part of a practice with other branches that are also requiring new MRI machines very soon.

    We will be initially looking at 3 new machines.

    Please might I ask what everyone would recommend and advise with respect to their own experiences with new machines. Philips, Siemens, Toshiba, uMR etc.

    Also, is it inadvisable to purchase a 3.0T machine if that machine will be a stand alone machine?

    I look forward to your insights.

    Thanks in advance

    Kind regards

    Colin

  14. One late insight, if you let me. No conflicts of interest here.

    Philips top of the line 1.5 offer includes an interesting magnet that works
    with less then 10l sealed helium, so there is no need for helium refuel
    (simpler maintanance down the road), no need for a quench tube (those thing
    sometimes can be an issue to deal depending on the installation site), and
    for safety situations, the magnet can be quenched and come back to
    operation in less the 12h.

    I have been working with two of those, different sites. Some issues about
    image consistency, but I believe the point is the operator…

    Marcel

    Em segunda-feira, 14 de março de 2022 às 03:30:26 UTC-3, Colin Turner
    escreveu:

  15. Learnt a lot from the discussion !

    We have a range of units with 2 x 3T (both Siemens), mostly Siemens 1.5T
    with 1 GE and 1 Hitachi. Our extremity 1.5T GE MR430s just got taken out
    cos no more service support, otherwise it was a great lil’ magnet for MSK,
    esp claustro patients. Being replaced with a 1.5T Philips.

    Agree with the general feeling that Siemens is consistent across all our
    sites. One other consideration is that with magnet life-spans getting
    longer, both Siemens and GE are offering mid-life upgrades to many of their
    units. From the vendor’s point, better to upgrade and keep my customer
    base, rather than it being replaced with a competitor’s magnet.

    For the customer (us in radiology), the advantage is a shorter downtime and
    familiarity with the user interface and capabilities. GE calls it the
    “Lift” and Siemens “Fit”. So we’ve upgraded our GE Hdxt to an Explorer_lift
    and Siemens Trio to Prisma_fit, both about 4 years ago, both working well
    with no issues. Considering doing the same to 1 or 2 of our oldest Aera to
    get a Sola_fit.

    Ian Tsou
    Singapore

Leave a Comment