Відео

hi its under exam card - CONTRAST - COMMON - Wrap-Up Magn - RESTORE

hi its under exam card - CONTRAST - COMMON - Wrap-Up Magn - RESTORE

I'm sorry I'm not familiar with GE.

Thanks for the input ☺️

Good questions. Applicable with all coils. And for 3T for better images and scan time purposes.

uh.... - The Siemens solution is currently inferior to the GE AirRecon DL and that by quite a a bit. With AirRecon DL u can acquire a much higher resolution and thinner slices than before in less time - i.e a knee Exam in 2.5mm and 0.5/0.4 voxel size in less than 7 minutes - the difference is remarkable

​@@brainthesizeofplanet I've been able to do 0.2mm voxel size in that same time on a Siemens. I think you might need to revisit your sequences. Also, I heard the GE Recon looks really smooth and plastic. Is this still the case?

@@calbang If u have the time u can do it - but better check that u are actually scanning in 0.2, most Siemens scanner show the calculated voxel size and not what u are scanning in. .what scanner are u using it on? The denoising if the GE solution is better and yes in high it looks very smooth/plastic - that's the result if the denoising . I doubt many ppl have a GE and Siemens with DL to compare, what I can tell for now is that the GE solution is more flexible, more advanced (3D sequences, blade and tse) and has better denoising - GE is currently running circles around Siemens with DL and they have a advantage of about 3 years in term of development i.e k-space artifact removal (gibbs, pulsation), complete k-space DL (Siemes is partly in 2d postprocessing), faster denoising calculations, a lot more sequences

​@@brainthesizeofplanet Acquiring voxel <0.4mm and reconstructed to 0.2mm. Something GE hasn't figured out how to do I believe, they're purely denoising and no super resolution? Ive also got access to both and found Siemens much higher image quality and sharper images. We always take patients off the GE with DL because the images are so smooth.

Correct. Using tse separste mode as far my experience you need to go beyond with phase oversampling as you say. Especially having small fov. It's sense parallel imaging based. Using integrated you can optimise as from what you are used to without Drb. But then sometimes images can turned out bad. Need to find the balance between those two options.

No it is mainly not about wrapping artifacts! - it is because of SNR and how DRB works or what u want. You can only get a faster exams by upping P value or reducing NEX. Most ppl also want a higher in plane resolution or thinner slices. So sometimes you reduce NEX to 1 from 2 and depending on the resolution your SNR is tool low even von DRB high. The other scenario is that u already have only 1 NEX ad can't go an lower here but want better and faster images, so u set grappa to 3 or 4 (4 introduces a sig noise and loss of detail) and u raise the resolution - in those cases u mostly get a 10-20% increase in in-plane Resolution. In both scenarios u can end up with not enough SNR in DRB high and u need oversampling to get 5-10% SNR "back" - that is why oversampling with DRB is mostly always higher set than it was with older protocols. This is also one of the main difference GE vs Siemens as GE offers "half nex" for TSE and 0.1 steps for Blade sequences. With GE u have much more flexibility in terms of speed and SNR with DL / AirRecon DL than u get with the Siemens system - we have a Siemens with DRB and a GE with "full" AirDL. Currently AirRecon DL is hugely superior to DRB - cleaner images, less artifacts (pulsation and gibbs artifact gets removed in k-space). Also the recon time faster, Siemens needs 25-30s per series to compute and display and GE only 5-10.

@@brainthesizeofplanet thanks for the input. 👍. They all got pros and cons in general. I'm not lucky as you to have those two vendors for comparison 🥲

​@@brainthesizeofplanetmy images on Siemens are reconstructing mid sequence with Deep Resolve.

Add a NEX and compensate for time/signal increase

@@iansze2652 As mentioned initially, adding an average does not fix it. I haven’t run more than 2 NEX, but adding a third basically negates the time saving benefits of DRB.

@@chrisunguez Hmmm, I assume also you've tried sat bands superior to the stack as well and this also doesn't work...I think all that's left is swapping your phase. I think sometimes adding even one more average in addition to the other fixes mentioned above may actually minimize the artifact/move it off the AOI. It would also depend on whether you are scanning on a 1.5T or a 3T, as a 3T would natrually pick up more motion/breathing/flow artifacts.

@@iansze2652 Superior sat bands don’t seem to help, either. I hadn’t considered swapping phase, since I’d assumed the breathing artifact A>P or P>A would be just as bad. But thanks, I might try F>H rather than H>F. Not sure if it’ll help, but worth a shot. Also, we only have DRB on our 1.5T at the moment. I’m curious to see how these various DRB artifacts look at a higher field strength.

@@chrisunguezhola, puedes probar cambiando la dirección de fase en F/H, disminuyendo el flip angle que también ayuda a diminuir los artefactos de movimientos y flujo,adicional a ello puedes colocar compensación de flujo en frecuencia y lo más importante… un posicionamiento correcto del paciente para evitar el artefacto de anefacto el cual se produce por recepción de señal fuera del FOV en zonas donde hay bobinas activadas

You can try and play with those settings. But most of the time it's between choosing integrated vs tse separate

If your ipat is set really high it may be worth it to add some additional reference lines so that the ref scan, whether separate or integrated, will be a bit more robust. If you don't have enough phase encoded data in some form, you can end up with like only 50 lines in the ky direction if you're not careful. Shouldn't affect time too much to increase it. Like Bac says double check what happens when you change it. Very high ipat and very few ref lines starve the reconstruction of real data, but deep resolve will still try to fill the gaps by making stuff up.

Depends on sequence and parameters used.

I don't think Philips have similar.

I never tried. But should work

That's nice.

Adjust also Rf pulse.

Head first reduce this issue. But also check this video. ua-cam.com/video/cNeufIi9pEA/v-deo.htmlsi=uNE6DiLiKbLM8qc2

3d truefisp ECG and resp triggered.

ua-cam.com/video/KgjtRH8VwD4/v-deo.htmlsi=Bz4TVYesFQ_KgEzn

No not yet.

Modified a high t2w sequences such as an mrcp.

www.amazon.com/Handbook-MRI-Technique-Catherine-Westbrook/dp/1119759331/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?crid=7VDC5HJ7QMAU&dchild=1&keywords=handbook+of+mri+technique&qid=1632856339&sprefix=handbook+of+mri&sr=8-2

Good question. Never done that. I guess some third part software are available for that.

mip not always working .special not reference lines. try raw data of angios. it should work.

It's Siemens E11e software. You probably have similar E11 also.

What flexi coil is this? Ultraflex 18ch?

@@Nguyen_MRI yes sir

@@emrearslan8274 i need to see some images. And i don't know how you position your patients and coil. Arms etc.

I would do it more or less like this: ua-cam.com/video/4nr2ZdAdT_o/v-deo.htmlsi=p8_QunEs9Y7bPLb5

Thank you sir i am watching right now and i wil try something if i don't fix this problem i will be write you again. Thanks your support

Many great learning platforms out there. Just have to Google specific topics because mri is a very wide topic. Start basic.

MRI master is best

Thanks for input. Indeed ☺️👍

Indeed it does

What slice thickness do you suggest if they want to see coronaries?

@@yusraaoraen thin as possible. 0.9-1mm max.

I did before with 0.65-0.75mm in cardiac congenital scans. In most, the image resolution was not that great to see coronaries. Thank you for the suggestion!

READ - sagittal and coronal. SLICE - transversal.

@@Nguyen_MRI Can I ask why you chose that?

@@angviethung791mri physics are like that. Or it won't work properly.

mriquestions.com/flow-compensation.html

Good question. You don't get exposed with radiation using mri. CT you do get exposed. And for dynamic more info here: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352047721000708

Upper you want to try that? What scanner and coil you have.?

@@Nguyen_MRI 1.5T SOLA / 3T VIDA. We have shoulder coil, but wrist and elbow are flex. (Currently we're doing knees regularly and feet rarely).

@@furreh Try ultraflex. Those are very good one.

Same plattform yes.biomatrix. 3T vs 1.5T.

@@Nguyen_MRI Thanks 🙏🏻

@@Ahaha4 you're welcome ☺️

Good morning. Check this: ua-cam.com/video/bnvA3RhB-Ew/v-deo.htmlsi=yjmcgIPSP8EqOx-V

I've tried on spine hemorrhage. Shows great on that case. MSK i also tried different areas. Not pelvis. Great idea let's try that 🤔☺️👍

We found that with the 3D MEDIC for things like T and L spines will have a lot of breathing artifacts, especially for 3T. A Sagittal SWI would be ideal, as many of our neuro rads ask for that

@@iansze2652 interesting. Even with LR encoding ? SWI is very prone to motion so I would assume that the breathing artifacts are as pronounced as a normal medic, no?

@@Nguyen_MRI cool! If you plan to do another SWI on the pelvis could you share your MSK results, please ? It would be helpful I think.

@@mihaimoldo We find using 100% oversampling for LR phase encoding to take too long even with acceleration (we do not have Deep Resolve yet). For Spine SWI, we would typically have phase HF then oversampled as necessary (not necessarily to 100%) and accel

build from brain

SWI in the Siemens tree is only found in the Brain currently . Bac took that brain SWI and optimized it for the Spine.