A Digital Publication for the Practicing Medical Specialist, Industry Executive & Investor

No Carolina / New York

A1 Medical Imaging’s CEO Compares Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ultrasound Technologies

Peter Solodko, the CEO of A1 Medical Imaging, compares the technological differences between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound technologies to help determine when one imaging approach is more appropriate than the other.

An ultrasound device gives off high-frequency sound waves that go through the body and creates images called sonograms. As the sound waves bounce off organs and structures, echoes are created. The machine generates the echoes into real-time images on a computer screen that can show the organs, movement, and blood flow. Ultrasound is commonly used to monitor pregnant women and their unborn babies. It is also used to guide a needle to do a biopsy or injection. The technology is non-invasive and does not emit radiation.

MRI is also noninvasive and does not involve radiation. It uses powerful magnets, radio waves and computers to obtain highly detailed, cross-sectional images of various parts of the body. It is used to investigate and diagnose conditions that affect soft tissue such as tumors, certain cancers, and joint, spinal, and ligament injuries and disease. It is commonly used to determine the extent of injury or disease of internal organs such as the brain and in the digestive system.

Ai Medical Imaging Ceo Peter Solodko“Ultrasound may be good at producing soft tissue images that don’t show up on X-rays,” Peter Solodko indicated. “However, it is limited in some parts of the body because the sound waves can’t go through air, such as the lungs, or through bone.”

MRI is a preferred technology for conditions that involve dense or large areas, while ultrasound can only view one small section at a time. Ultrasound images are not as detailed as MRI scans and cannot show whether a tumor is cancerous.

“Ultrasounds allow clinicians to observe what happens during movement, to see blood flow through arteries, for example,” Solodko explained. “But ultrasounds can’t show the structure inside joints. Because of that, MRI is the better choice to evaluate bone, cartilage and other structures inside and around a joint.”

“There are clear criteria regarding when to use either technology,” Peter Solodko concluded. “It’s up to the referring physician to determine which procedure is best given the individual patient’s situation.”

Medical Device News Magazinehttps://infomeddnews.com
Medical Device News Magazine provides breaking medical device / biotechnology news. Our subscribers include medical specialists, device industry executives, investors, and other allied health professionals, as well as patients who are interested in researching various medical devices. We hope you find value in our easy-to-read publication and its overall objectives! Medical Device News Magazine is a division of PTM Healthcare Marketing, Inc. Pauline T. Mayer is the managing editor.

More News!

“For patients in need of cardiovascular or cardiothoracic imaging, the SpotLight Duo is the first cardiothoracic CT incorporating all of Arineta’s patient centric technologies. With one heartbeat, we can provide both high-temporal as well as iso-temporal resolution images that can be used for comprehensive cardiac and thoracic CT assessment,” said Doug Ryan, CEO of Arineta
Building on its ZEISS Medical Ecosystem, several of the new innovations enable seamless data integration and management across the cataract and refractive workflows, creating a new standard for efficient, personalized ophthalmic care.
MinXray MinXray, a leading manufacturer of imaging systems for medical and veterinary use, recently sent its Impact Wireless X-ray system with a group of researchers...
New supply contract to bring Lunit INSIGHT CXR to TeleDiag in France and Lunit INSIGHT MMG to the Central region branch of the Portuguese League Against Cancer
KA Imaging reported a collection of positive metrics to its stakeholders, with revenue four times larger than that of the previous year and a 38% growth in headcount in 2023. The positive trend continues to be observed in Q1 2024.

By using this website you agree to accept Medical Device News Magazine Privacy Policy