Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 151 posts

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#41

Post by aidenn0 »

devwastaken wrote: post #35

How does this fare against patents? Isn't pretty much everything to do with the actual implementation of an MRI patented and copyrighted in some way to prevent anyone else from entering the game?

The very first NMRI images were published in the early 70s, so at least some of what is required must be public domain now. The original diffusion and perfusion patents are both from the 80s, so should also be expired I think?

That being said it's very hard to make any even slightly novel machine (MRI or otherwise) that isn't so close to an existing patent that a judge would dismiss a suit out of hand.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#42

Post by ska »

ratg13 wrote: post #33

When we say "low-cost", just how low cost are we talking here? I skimmed through the article, but still didn't comprehend how much something like this might actually cost.

The up front cost is only one part of the story.

Siting a conventional MRI is pretty expensive (often requires a new build 6 figures for sure) and operation costs can run up to even 5 fig/month for powerful ones.

They could probably get one of these out the door for approx 100k. Clinical scanners are typically 10x+ that.

Siting cost would be next to nothing, and operating costs low too.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#44

Post by wforfang »

omarhaneef wrote: post #7

Don't they already have something like this in the field? https://hyperfine.io

This exact product is mentioned in the article as evidence for clinical/market demand. It also shows precedence for FDA approval of a pretty similar instrument for clinical diagnostics. Although, its interesting to note that the hyperfine MRI (at least ostensibly) seems to do the same thing in a smaller/more portable form factor.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#45

Post by aidenn0 »

VikingCoder wrote: post #29
MauranKilom wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, but I believe "using AI for inference from sparse observations" is unfortunately a thing already.

That's not "unfortunate." Sparse observations save lives. A quicker MR. Less X-Ray exposure. It's totally valid to worry about validation, but to the degree you can validate image processing algorithms of any kind - AI or otherwise - they absolutely save lives.

NMRI use microwaves, not x-rays.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#46

Post by axg11 »

a-dub wrote: post #5

woah. woah. woah. hold on a second here... are we comfortable enough with understanding all of the behavior of deep learning models to where we can confidently put them in the pipeline for diagnostic clinical imaging? i'm okay with using them for image analysis, but denoising and other image production tasks seems dangerous. how do you know what you're looking at is real as opposed to something that just looks convin…

Whether you’re comfortable with it or not - it’s already happened and in production. Look up Subtle Medical and GE AIR Recon.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#47

Post by ISL »

Edit: This post was intended as a reply to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30209618 , presently below

> The lead author, Dr. Craig Bennett, wanted to get something fresh, so he headed in to the grocery story first thing in the morning. At the fish counter, he spoke the words that will echo down the centuries as a testimony to the dedication and drive of neuroscientists throughout the ages:

>"I need a full length Atlantic Salmon. For science."

That reminds me of the day that I needed a strong lightweight cable for a silica-fiber melting/drawing apparatus. After some puzzling, I realized that bicycle shift/brake cabling would probably be perfect for the task.

I'll never forget the puzzled look at the bike shop -- "What kind of bike are you putting it on?" "I'm not, I just need some brake cable for a science experiment...." As I recall, I think we finally settled on some precut cabling for a GT Zaskar of some kind.

Similar things came up the day that I needed a valve that switched faster than our dedicated micro-switching valves. A similar light-bulb went on, and I went down to the nearby auto shop for a fuel-injector.

"What kind of car do you need it for?"

"I don't, but there are a couple of different valve-switching protocols, some that latch open and others that accept straight TTL at reasonable currents. I need one of those."

That experiment was brought to you by an injector for, I believe, a Dodge Caravan, and later, when I needed another, an injector for a Ford Mustang. Fuel-injectors are really good valves.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#48

Post by SubiculumCode »

gnatman wrote: post #36
ratg13 wrote: post #33

When we say "low-cost", just how low cost are we talking here? I skimmed through the article, but still didn't comprehend how much something like this might actually cost.

Towards the bottom: "Such scanner can be made low cost to manufacture, maintain and operate. For quantity production, we estimate hardware material costs under USD20K."

That's cheap...just not cheap enough for me to want to build it in my garage as a party gag.

Re: A low-cost and shielding-free ultra-low-field brain MRI scanner

#50

Post by mabbo »

TheJoeMan wrote: post #32
lostlogin wrote: post #4

The images are better that I expected. The ‘FLAIR like’ image is not particularly FLAIR like. FLAIR are nicer to look at when fat saturated (not everyone agrees with that), but that’s probably not feasible at that field strength and adding scan time would be a problem on these long sequences. Voxel sizes of 2x2x10 are pretty terrible resolution, but if the alternative is nothing, I guess that’s ok. The static field i…

You know, sometimes all you need is “do I have a baseball sized tumor or not”.

This is precisely what saved my father's life last year.

16 years ago he had some kind of brain cyst. Totally benign. But as a follow up, the doctor ordered yearly MRIs, much to his annoyance.

Last year those yearly routine MRIs spotted a brain tumor- before it had time to get dangerous or cause any damage to him. It was growing quickly though and was right near his eye. Quick surgery got it out.

I want to live in a world where everyone has access to that.

Post reply on HN