• AI
  • Molecular Imaging
  • CT
  • X-Ray
  • Ultrasound
  • MRI
  • Facility Management
  • Mammography

Open MR is dead . . . Long live open MR

Article

Open MR has confounded reason for a long time. The trouble began in late 1999, when GE unveiled its OpenSpeed, a 0.7T system that the company framed as a high-field system. Its vertical field provided enough oomph to compete with high-field products;

Open MR has confounded reason for a long time. The trouble began in late 1999, when GE unveiled its OpenSpeed, a 0.7T system that the company framed as a high-field system. Its vertical field provided enough oomph to compete with high-field products; ergo, the classification as "high field." Then came Siemens a few weeks later at the RSNA meeting with a mock-up of a 1T scanner, a truly open high-field system, according to the company. But the mock-up proved to be more concept than concrete, and now, a little more than four years later, Siemens has formally given up the idea of developing a clam-shaped 1T open scanner.

On July 29, Siemens rolled out its answer to customers who want a high-field MR for patients afraid of tight spaces and others too big to fit in them. Siemens' answer is a cylindrical system-a large-bore ultracompact doughnut that looks more like a CT than an MR. For 60% of routine exams, the patient's head will actually be outside the magnet.

The company, which previously had a proclivity for naming MR scanners with musical whimsy-Symphony, Sonata, Harmony, Allegra, and Concerto-would have the imaging community whistling a different tune over its new large-bore Espree. Open MR, as it has been known up to this point, is pretty much over. Enter now "open-bore" MR.

Focusing on ultracompact large-bore MRs to make patients more comfortable makes a lot of sense. And Siemens is to be applauded for taking this concept to a new level. But the idea that Siemens has so successfully built upon is really not all that new.

Companies have been racheting down the footprint of their magnets for a dozen years. This last year they began widening the bore. The Espree does both of these better than any other system on the market, but does that mean it rates a whole new class of scanner?

This presents a heck of a quandary. The imaging community will have to decide whether to define open MR as a concept that provides patients with the feeling of openness or as a type of scanner that is open on three or more sides. It's a sticky wicket and it's only going to get stickier when the inevitable happens: The trend toward wider bore ultracompact systems continues, and competitors to the Espree will start popping up.

Related Videos
Emerging Research at SNMMI Examines 18F-flotufolastat in Managing Primary and Recurrent Prostate Cancer
Could Pluvicto Have a Role in Taxane-Naïve mCRPC?: An Interview with Oliver Sartor, MD
New SNMMI President Cathy Cutler, PhD, Discusses Current Challenges and Goals for Nuclear Medicine
Where the USPSTF Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations Fall Short: An Interview with Stacy Smith-Foley, MD
A Closer Look at MRI-Guided Transurethral Ultrasound Ablation for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer
Improving the Quality of Breast MRI Acquisition and Processing
Can Fiber Optic RealShape (FORS) Technology Provide a Viable Alternative to X-Rays for Aortic Procedures?
Does Initial CCTA Provide the Best Assessment of Stable Chest Pain?
Making the Case for Intravascular Ultrasound Use in Peripheral Vascular Interventions
Can Diffusion Microstructural Imaging Provide Insights into Long Covid Beyond Conventional MRI?
Related Content
© 2024 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.