Letter to the editor.
|Article Type:||Letter to the editor|
|Author:||Schilling, Ronald B.|
|Publication:||Name: Applied Radiology Publisher: Anderson Publishing Ltd. Audience: Academic Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Health Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2009 Anderson Publishing Ltd. ISSN: 0160-9963|
|Issue:||Date: Sept, 2009 Source Volume: 38 Source Issue: 9|
To the Editor:
The article "Body MR imaging: Sequences we use and why" (2009;5:7-12) brought back many memories of the early days of magnetic resonance imaging.
In the early '80s, as the president of the MRI division of Diasonics, I was very fortunate to have an amazing visionary as part of our advisory team. The individual is Alexander R. Margulis, MD, then chair of radiology at the University of California, San Francisco. Fortunately for Diasonics, the research lab, under the direction of Leon Kaufman, was part of UCSF. This enabled Diasonics to always be in tune with the "clinical/technical tie" as we called it. At the time, Alex made a most significant observation "If you can't see it with MRI, it is only because you haven't selected the right sequence."
The article by Andrea S. Kierans, MD, and her team make the point very clearly, by doing an excellent job of relating the fine points of sequence selection in order to obtain the desired imaging results.
In the conclusions, it is interesting to note the point, "As MRI continues to evolve, emphasis should always be placed on employing sequences that exhibit the best combination of: speed of acquisition, consistent image quality and consistent display of disease process."
There is an opportunity for a computer program, with input of the desired results and output of the best sequence, to meet the needs of obtaining these results. Almost 30 years later, the game goes on.
Ronald B. Schilling, PhD
RBS Consulting Group
Los Altos Hills, CA
|Gale Copyright:||Copyright 2009 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.|