off topic: why MRI and not nuclear imaging?

MRI is expensive and slower relative to Nuclear imaging. Many areas of the world don’t have enough (at all) MRIs. Nuclear imaging does not require a heavy investment, and I think it can be made portable, so you can take it to remote locations. MRI volume measurement is hard (that’s why we have this competition) and again, AFAIK, in Nuclear imaging the volume measurement is easier because you inject nuclear material into the blood and the radiation reading captured from the heart area using a nuclear camera is a good substitute for the volume of the blood inside the heart.


Link to Full Article: off topic: why MRI and not nuclear imaging?