Log In Sign up
The largest database of trusted experimental protocols
> Living Beings > Professional or Occupational Group > Radiologist

Radiologist

Radiologists are medical professionals who specialize in the interpretation and analysis of medical images, such as X-rays, CT scans, MRIs, and ultrasounds.
They play a crucial role in the diagnosis and management of various health conditions by providing valuable insights to other healthcare providers.
Radiologists use their extensive knowledge of human anatomy, physiology, and pathology to accurately interpret medical images, identify abnormalities, and recommend appropriate treatment plans.
Their expertise is essential in a wide range of medical fields, including oncology, cardiology, neurology, and orthopaedics.
Radiologists must adhere to strict safety protocols and utilize the latest imaging technologies to ensure accurate and reproducible results, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes.
Typo: 'managment'

Most cited protocols related to «Radiologist»

1
Quantifying Pulmonary Abnormalities in Viral Pneumonia
The major CT demonstrations were described using internationally standard nomenclature defined by the Fleischner Society glossary and peer-reviewed literature on viral pneumonia, using terms including ground glass opacity (GGO), crazy-paving pattern, and consolidation (12 (link)-14 (link)). A semi-quantitative scoring system was used to quantitatively estimate the pulmonary involvement of all these abnormalities on the basis of the area involved (15 (link)). Each of the 5 lung lobes was visually scored from 0 to 5 as: 0, no involvement; 1, <5% involvement; 2, 25% involvement; 3, 26%-49% involvement; 4, 50%-75% involvement; 5, >75% involvement. The total CT score was the sum of the individual lobar scores and ranged from 0 (no involvement) to 25 (maximum involvement).
The distribution of lung abnormalities was recorded as predominantly subpleural (involving mainly the peripheral one-third of the lung), random (without predilection for subpleural or central regions), or diffuse (continuous involvement without respect to lung segments) (16 (link)).
Image analysis was performed using the institutional digital database system (Vue PACS, version 11.3.5.8902, Carestream Health, Canada) by three radiologists (C.Z, B.L, and L.Y, who had 26, 25 and 22 years of experience in thoracic radiology, respectively) and final scores were determined by consensus.
Pan F., Ye T., Sun P., Gui S., Liang B., Li L., Zheng D., Wang J., Hesketh R.L., Yang L, & Zheng C. (2020). Time Course of Lung Changes On Chest CT During Recovery From 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pneumonia. Radiology.
Publication 2020
Atrial Premature Complexes Congenital Abnormality Lung Pneumonia, Viral Radiography, Thoracic Radiologist
2
Multidisciplinary Lung Adenocarcinoma Panel
Panel members included thoracic medical oncologists, pulmonologists, radiologists, molecular biologists, thoracic surgeons, and pathologists. The supporting associations nominated panel members. The cochairs were selected by the IASLC. Panel members were selected because of special interest and expertise in lung adenocarcinoma and to provide an international and multidisciplinary representation. The panel consisted of a core group (author list) and a reviewer group (Appendix 1, see Supplemental Digital Content 1 available at http://links.lww.com/JTO/A59, affiliations for coauthors are listed in appendix).
Travis W.D., Brambilla E., Noguchi M., Nicholson A.G., Geisinger K.R., Yatabe Y., Beer D.G., Powell C.A., Riely G.J., Van Schil P.E., Garg K., Austin J.H., Asamura H., Rusch V.W., Hirsch F.R., Scagliotti G., Mitsudomi T., Huber R.M., Ishikawa Y., Jett J., Sanchez-Cespedes M., Sculier J.P., Takahashi T., Tsuboi M., Vansteenkiste J., Wistuba I., Yang P.C., Aberle D., Brambilla C., Flieder D., Franklin W., Gazdar A., Gould M., Hasleton P., Henderson D., Johnson B., Johnson D., Kerr K., Kuriyama K., Lee J.S., Miller V.A., Petersen I., Roggli V., Rosell R., Saijo N., Thunnissen E., Tsao M, & Yankelewitz D. (2011). International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International Multidisciplinary Classification of Lung Adenocarcinoma. Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, 6(2), 244-285.
Publication 2011
Adenocarcinoma of Lung Oncologists Pathologists Pulmonologists Radiologist Surgeons Thumb
3
CT Imaging Characteristics of COVID-19 Patients
All CT images were reviewed by two fellowship-trained cardiothoracic radiologists with approximately 5 years of experience each (M.C. and A.B.) by using a viewing console. Images were reviewed independently, and final decisions were reached by consensus. For disagreement between the two primary radiologist interpretations, a third fellowship-trained cardiothoracic radiologist with 10 years of experience (A.J.) adjudicated a final decision. No negative control cases were examined, and no blinding occurred.
For each of the 21 patients, the initial CT scans were evaluated for the following characteristics: (a) presence of ground-glass opacities, (b) presence of consolidation, (c) number of lobes affected by ground-glass or consolidative opacities, (d) degree of lobe involvement in addition to overall lung “total severity score,” (e) presence of nodules, (f) presence of a pleural effusion, (g) presence of thoracic lymphadenopathy (defined as lymph node size of ≥10 mm in short-axis dimension), and (h) presence of underlying lung disease such as emphysema or fibrosis. Other abnormalities (eg, cavitation, reticulation, interlobular septal thickening, calcification, and bronchiectasis) were noted. Ground-glass opacification was defined as hazy increased lung attenuation with preservation of bronchial and vascular margins, and consolidation was defined as opacification with obscuration of margins of vessels and airway walls (7 (link)). Each of the five lung lobes was assessed for degree of involvement and classified as none (0%), minimal (1%–25%), mild (26%–50%), moderate (51%–75%), or severe (76%–100%). No involvement corresponded to a lobe score of 0, minimal involvement to a lobe score of 1, mild involvement to a lobe score of 2, moderate involvement to a lobe score of 3, and severe involvement to a lobe score of 4. An overall lung “total severity score” was reached by summing the five lobe scores (range of possible scores, 0–20). Eight patients underwent follow-up chest CT during the study time window. These scans were also evaluated to assess for change or progression over time, which was evaluated qualitatively with a consensus approach by two of the radiologists (M.C. and A.B.).
Chung M., Bernheim A., Mei X., Zhang N., Huang M., Zeng X., Cui J., Xu W., Yang Y., Fayad Z.A., Jacobi A., Li K., Li S, & Shan H. (2020). CT Imaging Features of 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV). Radiology.
Publication 2020
Biologic Preservation Blood Vessel Bronchi Bronchiectasis Calcinosis Chest Congenital Abnormality Disease Progression Epistropheus Fellowships Fibrosis Lung Lung Diseases Lymphadenopathy Nodes, Lymph Patients Pleural Effusion Pulmonary Emphysema Radiologist Radionuclide Imaging Reticulum X-Ray Computed Tomography
4
Consensus on Rectal Cancer Imaging
Similar to the methodology adopted for the 2012 consensus meeting [1 (link)] an adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was chosen [5 ], which combines postal and face-to-face rounds. For the present update, the process can be summarised as follows:

Literature review

Two of the organising members (DL, MM) in consensus searched current literature to identify newly available indexed scientific evidence regarding rectal cancer imaging, published following the 2012 meeting, which was used to update the questionnaires used for the 2012 consensus meeting by addition of topics not discussed previously.

Update of the questionnaires

Updated questionnaires were constructed by two organising members (DL, MM), in consultation with two others (SB, RB). The original 2012 questionnaire comprised 236 items. Seventeen new items were added, which mainly concerned the current use of tumour node metastasis (TNM) staging systems [6 , 7 ], the staging of tumours extending into the anal canal, criteria for nodal staging, use of structured reporting, and protocols for acquisition and evaluation of DWI. The questionnaire was divided into part A and part B. Part A included items reaching consensus in the 2012 meeting. Panellists were asked to indicate for each item whether they still agreed with the consensus statement reached previously or whether the item should be re-discussed. Part B combined items that did not reach consensus in 2012 with the additional 17 items derived from the updated literature review. All items were scored binomial (YES/NO; still valid or to be rediscussed) or ordinal (e.g. not recommended, recommended, mandatory), according to the individual item in question. Panellists were instructed to select ‘Mandatory’ for items that they considered were mandatory, ‘Recommended’ for items that they believed to be of additional benefit but that were not mandatory, and ‘Not recommended’ for items that they believed were not required and of no additional value.

Panel selection

The panel consisted of the same 14 panellists (BB, LC-S, HF, MG, SG, SH, CH, SHK, AL, AM, SR, JS, ST, MT) who participated in the 2012 consensus meeting. All were leading abdominal radiologists and members of ESGAR with recognised expertise and a publication track record within the field of rectal cancer imaging. The panel also included two non-voting Chairs (LB, RB) and three non-voting organising members (DL, MM, SB).

Questionnaire completion before the face-to-face meeting

Questionnaires were emailed to panellists on 11 May 2016. Panellists rated items independently with no interaction amongst each other and returned completed questionnaires by email.

Data analysis from questionnaire round

For each rated item from the electronic questionnaire round, two non-voting members (DL,MM) assessed whether or not consensus (defined as ≥ 80 % agreement) was reached.

Face-to-face panel meeting

A face-to-face panel meeting took place during the annual ESGAR meeting, Prague, 15 June 2016. Twelve of the 14 panellists attended. The meeting was moderated by two non-voting Chairs, RB and LB. Two non-contributing (non-voting) observers (DL, MM) documented key points of discussion and outcomes from the voting rounds. The results from the electronic questionnaire round formed the basis for discussion. Discussion included all items from the part A questionnaire selected for re-discussion by at least 20 % of the panellists in addition to all items from questionnaire part B that failed to reach consensus after the email round. Some items were rephrased or merged after face-to-face panel discussion (to reduce ambiguity or overlap) and as a result seven previously included items were discarded. After each item was discussed, panellists were asked to vote (using the same scoring systems as in the electronic round). Thirty items were not discussed face-to-face due to time constraints and were voted on by email subsequently.

Data analysis and reporting

Data from both electronic and face-to-face rounds were collected and descriptive metrics calculated by DL and MM. Each item was ultimately classified as: (1) ‘Appropriate’ with ≥ 80 % agreement, (2)’ Inappropriate’ with ≥ 80 % agreement or (3; Uncertain (no consensus, i.e. < 80 % agreement).

Beets-Tan R.G., Lambregts D.M., Maas M., Bipat S., Barbaro B., Curvo-Semedo L., Fenlon H.M., Gollub M.J., Gourtsoyianni S., Halligan S., Hoeffel C., Kim S.H., Laghi A., Maier A., Rafaelsen S.R., Stoker J., Taylor S.A., Torkzad M.R, & Blomqvist L. (2017). Magnetic resonance imaging for clinical management of rectal cancer: Updated recommendations from the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting. European Radiology, 28(4), 1465-1475.
Publication 2017
Abdomen Acclimatization Anal Canal Face Neoplasm Metastasis Neoplasms Radiologist Rectal Cancer
5
Multi-level CT Image Quality Assurance
Quality assurance of CT images is multi-level. Each CT scan is visually inspected by the local clinical radiologist for adequate inspiration, absence of motion artifact, and inclusion of all parts of the chest. At the Imaging Core, a trained Professional Research Assistant evaluates the scan for technical completeness, compliance with protocol, adequacy of inspiration, and presence of motion artifact. The quality of the automated segmentations of airways is verified. Finally, the stability of CT measurements for each scanner used in the study is monitored by monthly scanning using a custom COPDGene phantom designed for this study.
Regan E.A., Hokanson J.E., Murphy J.R., Make B., Lynch D.A., Beaty T.H., Curran-Everett D., Silverman E.K, & Crapo J.D. (2010). Genetic Epidemiology of COPD (COPDGene) Study Design. COPD, 7(1), 32-43.
Publication 2010
Chest Inhalation Protocol Compliance Radiologist X-Ray Computed Tomography

Most recents protocols related to «Radiologist»

1
Epidural Injection Distribution Pattern Evaluation
Prior to administration, the data regarding the demographic characteristics, such as, pain duration, pain severity, and involved nerve root were extracted. Two radiologists retrospectively analyzed and recorded the IDP on postintervention CT scanning images. The injection spread patterns in the cross-sectional CT images included the following: Zone I: extra-foraminal; Zone II: the foraminal spaces; Zone III: intra-foraminal (Figure 3).

The injection distribution area in the cross section of CT image: Line A is from anterolateral vertebral body to the lateral margin of the facet. Line B is from posterior-lateral vertebral body to the interior margin of the facet. Line C is the axial centerline of the epidural space. Zone I The out space of line A is extra-foraminal; Zone II: Between line A and B is the foraminal spaces; Zone III: Between line B and C is intra-foraminal/epidural spaces.

An investigator blinded to the patient assignments/treatments performed patient follow-ups, and recorded pain scores, particularly, NRS during hospital visits at 2 hours, 1 week, and 4 weeks after injection.
Safety was assessed as follows: ① Bleeding situation: Prior to drug injection, we recorded whether there was blood upon withdrawal, and verified the presence or absence of hematoma via CT scan. ② Other adverse reactions, including, puncture point pain, shortness of breath, paresthesias, motor deficit, hematoma, dizziness, headache, vomiting, general spinal anesthesia, and so on.
Ma L., Wang Y., Yao M., Huang B., Deng J, & Wen H. (2023). Evaluating the Extent of Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Selective Nerve Root Block in the Lower Cervical Spine: Evidence Based on Computed Tomography Images. Journal of Pain Research, 16, 669-676.
Publication 2023
BLOOD Dyspnea General Anesthesia Headache Hematoma Nervousness Pain Paresthesia Patients Pharmaceutical Preparations Plant Roots Punctures Radiologist Safety Severity, Pain Spaces, Epidural Vertebral Body X-Ray Computed Tomography
2
Thoracolumbar Spinal MRI Evaluation Protocol
Thoracolumbar spinal MRI examinations were performed at the Department of Radiology, Carlanderska Hospital using a 1.5 T scanner (Signa, GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA). The MRI protocol included sagittal T1-and T2-weighted sequences (Th1-S1). In the thoracic spine, a field of view of 360 × 360mm2 and slice thickness of 3 mm was used. In the lumbar spine a field of view of 320 × 320mm2 and slice thickness of 3.5 mm was utilized.
The MRI images were classified by a senior radiologist (> 15 years of experience) according to a predetermined standardized protocol. Disc degeneration was classified according to the Pfirrmann classification [23 (link)]. In the thoracic spine, no distinction between Pfirrmann grade 1 and grade 2 was made since the resolution of the images was not considered adequate for reliable differentiation between these grades. Vertebral and endplate changes were classified according to the Modic classification [24 (link)] and a modified Endplate defect score, adapted to our MRI protocol. The Endplate defect score [25 (link)] was modified where Type I-III (representing no degeneration) were pooled (Table 1). Schmorl’s nodes were classified as present or not present and defined as a vertebral endplate irregularity associated with intraspongious disc herniation, irrespective of the size, at either the cranial or caudal endplate, or at both endplates relative to the lumbar disc level. Spondylolisthesis was assessed as either present or not [26 , 27 (link)]. Similarly, vertebral apophyseal injury, defined as any irregularity or signal changes in the apophyseal region, was categorized as either present or not.

Modified endplate score, based on the original endplate defect score [25 (link)]

Modified endplate defect scoreOriginal endplate defect score
1Type I—Normal endplate with no interruption
Type II—Thinning of the endplate, no obvious break
Type III—Focal endplate defect with established disc marrow contact but with maintained endplate contour
2Type IV—Endplate defects < 25% of the endplate area
3Type V—Endplate defects up to 50% of the endplate area
4Type VI—Extensive damaged endplates up to total destruction
Intra-observer and inter-observer reliability measures were carried out on a set of 15 individuals (5 of the climbers and 10 back pain patients not included in the current study) by the senior radiologist and an additional radiologist (5 years of experience). The latter repeated the evaluation after one month, blinded to previous result.
Identeg F., Lagerstrand K., Hedelin H., Senorski E.H., Sansone M, & Hebelka H. (2023). Low occurrence of MRI spinal changes in elite climbing athletes; a cross-sectional study. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 15, 29.
Publication 2023
Back Pain Cranium Focal Adhesions Intervertebral Disc Degeneration Intervertebral Disk Displacement Lumbar Region Marrow Patients Physical Examination Radiologist Spinal Injuries Spondylolisthesis Vertebra Vertebrae, Lumbar Vertebral Column X-Rays, Diagnostic
3
German Radiologists' Job Satisfaction and Career Aspirations
For this survey, an institutional review board exemption (Charité – University Medicine Berlin, EA1/174/20) was obtained. All analyses were conducted in compliance with the revised Declaration of Helsinki.
A questionnaire was distributed via the German Roentgen Society’s (DRG) conference of university professors (KLR) and German Young Radiology Forum, the European Society of Radiology (ESR) and its Radiology Trainee Forum, and the Radiological Society of North America’s (RSNA) Resident and Fellow Committee and manually sent to 4500 radiologists of the biggest German hospitals between December 2020 and April 2021. It consisted of 66 items about (a) professional background, (b) current professional situation, (c) job satisfaction, (d) career aims, and (e) personal information. To enable quantitative analyses of the participants’ responses, besides open questions, Likert scales, e.g., to assess the agreement to different work expectations, were employed. The complete questionnaire is provided as Supplement 1 to this article.
As most respondents worked in Germany and the number of participants from other countries was not representative, this article only employs data from participants with German affiliations.
Molwitz I., Kemper C., Stahlmann K., Oechtering T.H., Sieren M.M., Afat S., Gerwing M., Bucher A.M., Storz C., Langenbach M.C., Reim M., Lotz J., Zagrosek-Regitz V., Can E., Köhler D., Yamamura J., Adam G., Hamm B, & Keller S. (2023). Work expectations, their fulfillment, and exhaustion among radiologists of all career levels: what can be learned from the example of Germany. European Radiology, 33(8), 5664-5674.
Publication 2023
Conferences Dietary Supplements Ethics Committees, Research Europeans Job Satisfaction Pharmaceutical Preparations Radiologist University Professor X-Rays, Diagnostic
4
Work Conditions and Radiologist Satisfaction
Continuous variables are provided as mean and standard deviation (SD), and categorical variables as absolute and relative frequencies.
All analyses were adjusted for age and gender. Linear regression models were employed for continuous variables (e.g., number of children), multinomial logistic regressions for multi-categorical variables (e.g., current position), and binary logistic regressions for binary variables (e.g., part-time). Independent binary logistic regressions were used for the association of socioeconomic aspects and work conditions with job expectations, their fulfillment, exhaustion, and satisfaction with support systems. Likert scale responses were dichotomized into, e.g., very important/important vs. not so important/not important, or always/mainly fulfilled vs. hardly/not fulfilled. To increase group size and thus statistical reliability, for comparisons between participants at different career levels, the categories senior physicians and leading senior physicians from the questionnaire were combined. For employed and self-employed radiologists in ambulatory care, separate and combined analyses were conducted.
Concerning missing variables, participants who did not indicate their gender (n = 6) were excluded from the analyses as were participants of diverse gender due to small numbers (n = 2). Radiologists working in other countries than Germany were few (n = 84 vs. n = 510), originated from 33 different countries, and were thus excluded to ensure validity and comparability of the analyses.
Because of the explorative study design, p-values were not adjusted for multiplicity and should be considered as descriptive summary measures. All calculations were performed in SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute).
Molwitz I., Kemper C., Stahlmann K., Oechtering T.H., Sieren M.M., Afat S., Gerwing M., Bucher A.M., Storz C., Langenbach M.C., Reim M., Lotz J., Zagrosek-Regitz V., Can E., Köhler D., Yamamura J., Adam G., Hamm B, & Keller S. (2023). Work expectations, their fulfillment, and exhaustion among radiologists of all career levels: what can be learned from the example of Germany. European Radiology, 33(8), 5664-5674.
Publication 2023
Care, Ambulatory Child Gender Physicians Radiologist Satisfaction
5
TACE Response Evaluation in HCC
All patients with HCC were treated using conventional TACE by two experienced interventional radiologists who had at least 10 years of experience. We administered a mixture of iodized oil (range: 4–16 mL) and doxorubicin hydrochloride (range: 5–50 mg) or mitomycin-C (range: 10–20 mg) via the tumor-feeding hepatic arteries. We finished the procedure when the tumor feeding branch was completely embolized by gelatin sponge particles. The decision to repeat TACE session was made on demand at an interval of 6–12 weeks in patients with favorable liver function and performance status.
We evaluated baseline CT scans before TACE and 1-month post-TACE to evaluate TACE responses. The treatment response was assessed based on the imaging studies of the patients, which were either 4-phase contrast-enhanced CT scan or dynamic magnetic resonance imaging within 1 month after the initial TACE. The modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) was used to assess radiological changes of HCC after treatment16 (link). The criteria have four categories; complete response (CR); partial response (PR); stable disease (SD); and progressive disease (PD). Complete or partial response in the imaging study at 1-month post-TACE was classified as TACE response whereas stable or progressive disease was defined as no response. Assessment of tumor response was reviewed independently by two radiologists with expertise in liver imaging to minimize variability. In cases of disagreement, the final decision was obtained by consensus.
Bannangkoon K., Hongsakul K., Tubtawee T., Ina N, & Chichareon P. (2023). Association of myosteatosis with treatment response and survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing chemoembolization: a retrospective cohort study. Scientific Reports, 13, 3978.
Publication 2023
ADAM17 protein, human Gelatins Hepatic Artery Hydrochloride, Doxorubicin Iodized Oil Liver Microscopy, Phase-Contrast Mitomycin Neoplasms Patients Porifera Radiologist Radionuclide Imaging X-Ray Computed Tomography X-Rays, Diagnostic

Top products related to «Radiologist»

1
Matlab by MathWorks
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Japan, Sweden, Austria, Morocco, Switzerland, Australia, Belgium, Italy, Netherlands, China, France, Denmark, Norway, Hungary, Malaysia, Israel, Finland, Spain
MATLAB is a high-performance programming language and numerical computing environment used for scientific and engineering calculations, data analysis, and visualization. It provides a comprehensive set of tools for solving complex mathematical and computational problems.
2
Syngo via by Siemens
Sourced in Germany, United States
Syngo.via is a medical imaging software platform developed by Siemens. It is designed to assist healthcare professionals in the visualization, analysis, and interpretation of medical images from various modalities, including computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET).
3
Somatom definition flash by Siemens
Sourced in Germany, United States, Japan, Netherlands, United Kingdom
The SOMATOM Definition Flash is a computed tomography (CT) scanner developed by Siemens. It is designed to provide high-quality imaging for a wide range of medical applications. The SOMATOM Definition Flash utilizes advanced technology to capture detailed images of the body, enabling medical professionals to make accurate diagnoses and inform treatment decisions.
4
Logiq e9 by GE Healthcare
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Japan, China, Austria, Germany, France, Italy
The LOGIQ E9 is an ultrasound imaging system designed for general diagnostic use. It features advanced image processing capabilities to produce high-quality images. The system provides a range of functionality to support clinical decision-making.
5
Brilliance 64 by Philips
Sourced in United States, Netherlands, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom
The Philips Brilliance 64 is a computed tomography (CT) imaging system designed for medical diagnostic purposes. It features a 64-slice detector configuration, enabling rapid data acquisition and high-resolution imaging. The Brilliance 64 provides detailed anatomical information to support clinical decision-making for a variety of medical applications.
6
Achieva by Philips
Sourced in Netherlands, Germany, United States, United Kingdom, Japan
The Philips Achieva is a versatile laboratory equipment designed for a range of analytical and research applications. It offers advanced capabilities for tasks such as sample preparation, separation, and detection. The Achieva is engineered to provide reliable and consistent performance, making it a valuable tool for various scientific disciplines.
7
Hdi 5000 by Philips
Sourced in United States, Netherlands, Japan
The HDI 5000 is a high-performance ultrasound system designed for a wide range of clinical applications. It features advanced imaging technologies and a user-friendly interface to support clinicians in their daily practice. The core function of the HDI 5000 is to provide clear and detailed ultrasound images to aid in diagnosis and treatment planning.
8
Ingenia by Philips
Sourced in Netherlands, Germany, United States, Switzerland, Japan
The Philips Ingenia is a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system designed for diagnostic imaging. It provides high-quality images of the body's internal structures to aid in the detection and diagnosis of various medical conditions.
9
Magnetom skyra by Siemens
Sourced in Germany, United States
The MAGNETOM Skyra is a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system developed by Siemens. It is designed to provide high-quality imaging for various medical applications. The MAGNETOM Skyra utilizes advanced technology to generate detailed images of the body's internal structures without the use of ionizing radiation.

More about "Radiologist"

Radiologists are medical imaging experts who specialize in the interpretation and analysis of diagnostic images such as X-rays, CT scans, MRIs, and ultrasounds.
They play a crucial role in the diagnosis and managment of various health conditions by providing valuable insights to other healthcare providers.
Radiologists leverage their extensive knowledge of human anatomy, physiology, and pathology to accurately interpret medical images, identify abnormalities, and recommend appropriate treatment plans.
Their expertise is essential across a wide range of medical fields, including oncology, cardiology, neurology, and orthopaedics.
Radiologists must adhere to strict safety protocols and utilize the latest imaging technologies, such as MATLAB, Syngo.via, SOMATOM Definition Flash, LOGIQ E9, Brilliance 64, Achieva, HDI 5000, Ingenia, and MAGNETOM Skyra, to ensure accurate and reproducible results, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes.
Their role is critical in providing accurate diagnoses and guiding effective treatment strategies.
As imaiging technoloigy continues to evolve, radiologists must stay at the forefront of advancements to deliver the highest quality care.