RE:GE healthcare and reconstruction with AI Hi Graham,
Thanks for sharing your dd. If facing open heart surgery, who wouldn't want the best scan even if it meant only 1% more accuracy? MRIs will always be in cardiologists' toolkit. If I'm going for a regular checkup and a VMS can give me accurate info needed in 5 minutes vs 45-60 minutes in regular echo suite or longer in a MRI, I'll take the VMS. That's just me.
In January 2000 I had heart surgery to replace my tricuspid valve and I was presented the option to correct my other congenital defect through reconstruction. I seriously considered the option and declined, however if presented with VMS vs MRI for reconstruction today, I would choose MRI.
I'm saying that there is room for both tools in this field, both have pros/cons such as time, money, high-res, etc. The industry needs both and VMS seems to be an excellent choice for day to day diagnosis that can help a cardiologist decide if a MRI is warranted.
GrahamB wrote:
Was researching on artificial intelligence and cardiac imaging and looked for updates on the GE Edison website. There was some pretty interesting information on the impressive improvements in image quality and in resolution that were made possible using deep learning image reconstruction techniques.
I didn't see anything on VPT or on echo-but maybe some information is coming?
So far MRI is still the leading method recommended by Cardiologists as outlined on the GE website.
'Great news for patients though that reconstruction with AI is gaining traction.
https://www.gehealthcare.com/article/advancing-cardiac-magnetic-resonance-imaging-with-deep-learning-image-reconstruction