Cheap Hi-Res MRI's in Los Angeles

[ZorroSF]

So I came across this website in one of these threads;

http://www.tiopenmri.com/welcome.html

They offer hi resolution MRI's for $400 per section. I had my cervical, thorassic, Lumbar and hip joints for $1200. That would typically cost you ~$2500 per section at a hospital.

The owner and staff were very nice and let me see the images as we went from section to section. The technician was not diagnosing me, but was literate in reading MRI's and could discuss with me certain areas and could concur with I observed and missed.

There's nothing cryptic like some hospitals that make you wait one to two weeks or longer for results and even make you go back to them to get a cd created. My full body MRI was done in about 1.5 hrs with CD, and I scheduled it 5 days ahead of time. It takes roughly one business day to receive results from a radiologist.

The owner's name is Julien. Really nice guy and even helped me with a ride to and from his location in Santa Clarita. I don't think that's normal, so don't expect it.

Total Imaging & Open MRI
Santa Clarita Corporate Office
18560 Via Princessa Suite 120
Santa Clarita, CA 91387

Phone: (661) 250-4611
Fax: (661) 250-9356
Info@tiopenmri.com


I'm not pushing a service or advertising for anyone. No kickbacks, I paid full cash price like everyone else. He mentioned to me that he accepts insurance. Please inquire with him about the procedure. It's still very worth your while especially if you have a deductable that needs to be paid.

If you live in the los angeles metro area, and hate getting jacked by insurance companies and hospitals then look him up. From hollywood/west hollywood to santa clarita took about 30-45min each way. That's including forest fire traffic if you've been reading the news.

If you have any questions feel free to post them here and if you've learned any new information please post it here too. Please do not post any info that cannot be offered to every person who inquires.

[Harrison]

Thanks for posting this! Now if we can just reproduce this for every point of medical care for 10-15,000 procedures, we'll have true "pricing transparency."

Sarcasm aside, it is a helpful benchmark. At least it's progress!

[ans]

Thanks Zorro. I didn't know that these MRI's have more resolution. ~Allan

[2cool4U]

It's a marketing gimmick. The resolution, I mean, not the price.

-tc-

[annapurna]

In the actual scan, I can't see more or less resolution but wouldn't the number of scans or width of the slice have the same effect of "high resolution." I realize that there would be a minimum scan width but down to that, wouldn't more scans look like a "high resolution" scan?

If I had my druthers, though, I'd look for a MRI run by someone who does orthopedic issues primarily rather than whatever comes in the door. The experience we've had is that the tricks you build by doing the same kinds of scans all the time really do make a difference when looking for the little details.

[cls]

Originally Posted by tconner94

It's a marketing gimmick. The resolution, I mean, not the price.

-tc-

TC,
Can you give any information on what are the latest and greatest MRI and CT scan equipment? I've recently had a comment about the quality of my CT scan and wonder if it was done on older technology or whether it may be a technician issue (or both). I have a choice in selecting my facility so perhaps I should do so based upon what kind of equipment is available? Any input?

[2cool4U]

Image resolution is determined strictly by the size of the image matrix on the film or the screen, e.g. 256x256, 512x512, 1024x1024. You are correct that each MR sequence is generated by parameters that can be controlled, e.g. slice thickness, # of repetitions of the RF pulse, field of view, type of coil; I could go on. Counterintuitively, a thinner slice does not equal a higher resolution, but actually results in greater image noise and grainier images b/c a thin volume emits less signal than a thicker volume, so the ratio of image signal to background noise is lower. Obviously, though, we need to use thinner slice images when looking for small things, but we have to boost the signal, lengthen the time we listen, or increase the number of times the RF signal is applied.

There are trade-offs when doing that, too, as the study time is now longer. That means some patients start to get antsy and move around, and movement is a big no-no in MRI. Unlike CT, which actually takes a slice (or 64-256 slices at once) and then moves on, MRI images are generated over an area or volume. If a patient moves during the acquisition, the entire series of images is usually affected, and the whole 3-6 min. sequence has to be repeated.

Back to the original post, image resolution is what I was specifically referring to. Images typically are 512x512 as an oversimplification. If someone bumped it up to 1024x1024, I doubt if anyone would notice a significant difference. Boosting magnet strengths to 2T or 3T will work, but I don't think they are approved for clinical work. If so, and if that is what the OP is referring to, then I'll stand corrected.

Hope this helps, and I'll admit at the end that I'm not the final word on MR physics by a long shot..

-tc-

[2cool4U]

cis,

The latest in CT involves multislice detectors. They've been around for a while, it's just that they keep adding detectors. CT scanners use a thin beam of xrays that spins around with a detector 180 degrees opposite to detect the radiation transmitted through your body. Software interpolation then generates pics (slices) based on the different densities of tissue in each slice; basically water, air, bone or soft tissue.

Several years ago manufacturers moved from a 180 degree spin to a 360 degree spin then to spiral which moves and spins, and then to multidetector machines. Now, instead of having one slice at a time, a scanner will take as many as 256 slices at once as it moves. We just installed 256-slice machines here, we have been working with 64-slice units. The biggest advantages here are that scan time decreases, which also helps us minimize patient movement, breathing, or cardiac pulsation; and that we can now get dynamic studies to assess changes in a structure as contrast is given. Cardiac CT's, CT angiograms, pancreas and liver tumor blood flow studies; there a many, many benefits.

I'm not aware of a specific benefit of using multislice units for spine imaging, other than scan time. You are in and out in 2 mins. When I first entered practice, it took 20 mins. You do want to make sure that you get imaged on a machine that at least is capable of spiral detection, b/c then we can use the axial (cross-section) images to generate better coronal (frontal) and sagittal (side or lateral) sections. Older units will do it, but spiral images are acquired w/o any gaps, so the reconstructed images look better and yield better diagnostic info.

Everything I've said here about MRI and CT is dependent on having well-trained technologists. They are key, and much more important than trying to pick a specific machine that is best, as annapurna points out. However, when it comes to spine work, most orthopods that own machines don't do it or do the study and send them to a radiologist to read. I'm sure there are exceptions, and I'm sure some knowledgeable reader on here will point them out to me, but most orthopedic-specific MRI machines are used to do knees, hips, elbows, etc. A spine study does not require a separate coil, the main magnet is the coil. Smaller joints require dedicated coils for quality work. Larger facilities will have these, as well as breast coils, but I'm sure there are small hospitals out there that don't. A shoulder or knee done on the body or spine coil will not turn out that great, and I would look to avoid having one done this way.


Hope this helps. Whew, too much physics on Monday after working all weekend, too..

-tc-