3 Tesla mri question

[Lulu54]

Someone told me the big difference between 1.5T and 3T is the time it takes to complete the scan. He told me the 3T takes much longer.  

This someone is an engineer working on a program to MRI image brains for schizophrenia.  I'm just wondering if he has this right or did I hear him incorrectly.

Waiting for an answer but don't know for how long!
Laura

[Lulu54]

Thanks for the responses.  I believe my next MRI (in December) is on a 3T - I'll take mental notes on the time it takes and the noise level and let you know what difference I observe!

Laura

PS Quix it is good to have you back, no buts about it!!!

[Fluffysmom]

My MS specialist told me that they had a 7T at OHSU, and then said "we don't use it on people".  I about cracked up!  I had already guessed that it would be to strong to try on living humans at this point, but I had this vision of them strapping rats or something to send into the MRI tube...  I figured they used cadavers.  I'm a full body donor, btw.

I wish I could get a 3T on my spine, as I had "patchy areas" that 2 neuros dismissed as artifact, though my sports and spine doc didn't agree.  I would love to see if there are really lesions in those areas, or what.  So far I was told no, unless I have something major happen.  

I guess my parasthesias and stuff don't qualify; I guess I need to have weakness or spasticity or something.  Anything that might qualify so far can also be explained by my back issues and referred pain, or knee issues, etc.

I would be curious to see what a 3T would show in my brain.  Maybe when I have my 1 year follow-up.  I blew my latest chance, thinking I should have my MRI done on the same machine for comparison purposes. A 3T would have shown things more clearly, even if it was different.  Sigh!

Thanks, Quix, for this excellent clarification.  It never hurts to ask, when you're going in for an MRI, to have it done on a 3T machine.  If it's available, go for it.  :o)

Kathy

[Quixotic1]

Sorry I've been so absent here, I'm still not up to snuff.  

No, there is a difference in resolution between the 1.5T and the 3.0T and between all the other lower strength MRIs.  As far as your friend and the things that they are imaging in schizophrenia, he may be correct.  But, (and for us this is a big "but' - or in my case, a big butt) when it comes to visualizing MS lesions, the difference is much more important than time.

In back to back studies the 3T picked up from 10% to 25% more MS brain lesions than the 1.5T.  In my case back to back comparison picked up 6 lesions on the spinal MRI (3T) versus not picking up ANY lesions on the 1.5T.  

They are studying the ability of a 7T (seven) to pick up lesions (on cadaver brains).   It also is picking up a large number of lesions (I'd have to find the study to see the percentage) more than the 3T.

One of the main things that thses studies tell us is that in the lower resolution MRI machines many lesions are still INVISIBLE.  This is true even for the 3T (because the higher machine still shows more lesions).   We need to remember this when our neurologist tell us that there is no such thing as an invisible lesion or when they say that "no lesions" means "no MS."

So, for us, that software engineer is quite wrong.  The higher resolution and greater pick-up of lesions is the main difference we care about.  This is really important for everyone to understand.

Quix

[sllowe]

I thought it had to do with the strength of the magnet.  So, does that could mean that it's quicker by being stronger? Sure makes sense to me, stronger magnet = quicker imaging, more capability, etc....

Thinking it sounds right, but I'm just taking a wild uneducated guess.  Peek if you can at that MRI link I posted on our "need favorite links" thread...maybe there is something on that site ref the strengths....

ttys,
Shell