Slashdot Log In
Imaging Breakthrough "Sees" Lung Disease
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Aug 08, 2007 03:25 PM
from the good-vibrations dept.
from the good-vibrations dept.
Roland Piquepaille writes "According to BusinessWeek, an Israeli startup, aptly named Deep Breeze, has developed a high-tech replacement for the 200-year-old stethoscope. This noninvasive device can draw, in seconds, an image of your lungs by listening to its vibrations. The Vibration Response Imaging (VRI) system could already be used in Israel, Europe and South Korea. Last month, the US Food and Drug Administration approved its introduction in the US. But don't expect to see one of these systems used by your local physician anytime soon. This VRI system will carry a price tag of over $40K."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Is that a lot? (Score:5, Insightful)
But is $40K a lot as far as medical devices cost? How much is the x-ray machine at the doctor's office, or the ultrasound equipment at the heart specialist?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is that a lot? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Is that a lot? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
It's cheap, but might be overpriced. (Score:3, Insightful)
But is $40K a lot as far as medical devices cost? How much is the x-ray machine at the doctor's office, or the ultrasound equipment at the heart specialist?
Those machines go from $50,000 (xray) to $3,000,000 (CT, Linac, MRI). QC, operators and electricity are also expensive.
That makes this device sound cheap, but it could be way overpriced if it's nothing more than a microphone hooked to a stethoscope run through some FFTs. In that case, you are paying for a database of frequency signatures. Even if
Expensive? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Expensive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Meaning, from a marketing standpoint, saying that their product "replaces" the stethoscope is sexy to say, but actually pulling it off is a completely different thing all together...
Parent
$40grand? (Score:3, Insightful)
At $40,000 it may not be around every doctor's neck, but geez just the exam table I sit on and the scale they make me stand on totals a staggering amount. I can't imagine something in the tens of thousands being cost prohibative to the medical field.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It really is that simple.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If insurance companies refuse to cover it, very few Doctors & hospitals will buy it.
If it can eliminate the need for sending patients out for chest X-rays[0], the HMOs will mandate it. Hell, I can see them refusing to pay for a chest X-ray or MRI if you haven't been checked out on one of these first. If all it takes is the electricity to run it, some saline gel for the electrodes/transponder/whatever and an annual maintenance contract, this thing will save money hand over fist in some areas.
[0] Obviously not all patients, but (say) 30-50% of those who come in complaining of shortness of
Cost vs need (Score:5, Insightful)
In any case this is a good step forward and I'm glad to hear about it...
Now, where did I put that pack of Camels???
Costs (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Costs (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Cheers!
PICTURES, DANG IT (Score:5, Insightful)
Why, when there is an article about something visual, especially a revolutionary new visualization system, do they never show pictures.
I hate that.
If you are reporting on a neat visual thingy,... SHOW ME THE THINGY. Even a picture of the machine would be a plus, even if it looks exactly like an MRI or some other machine. I don't care if the picture may mean nothing to me. Put a little caption trying to explain it. It doesn't matter, show me SOMETHING.
Does anyone have a picture?
This should be criminal.
(the annoyed MBCook)
Re:PICTURES, DANG IT (Score:4, Funny)
Oh sure. You say that, and get +5 Funny. I say that, and I get a visit from the police.
Parent
40k? (Score:3, Informative)
When MRI and other can cost over $1 million, 40k isn't that much.
Here are some pictures and videos (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.deepbreeze.com/ [deepbreeze.com]
Multimedia:
http://medgadget.com/archives/2007/07/video_of_vr
http://www.medgadget.com/archives/2007/07/new_pul
http://www.thieme.de/viamedici/aktuelles/wissensc
Physicians will still use their ears (Score:3, Interesting)
$40k scaling down to $10k, and why not stethoscope (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
$40K is chump change. A decent MRI machine costs at least a couple of million dollars. Just starting up the machine can cost $100,000 (you don't turn them off when you're done). Upgrades generally run hundreds of thousands of dollars. More importantly, like x-rays, MRIs and CT-Scanners, not every doctor needs one. A specialist would have it or a radiology center would have it and the doctor sends you there to get the work done, just like x-rays, MRIs and CT scans.
If th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fraud alert -- Possible fraud (Score:4, Interesting)
The BusinessWeek article says, amazingly, begging the question, "Its sales prospects are not just hot air"
Notice that, at present, there is no period at the end of that sentence, suggesting that the article received little or no attention from an editor.
Slashdot has run several stories about companies that had products that they were supposedly trying to bring to market, but which, on close examination, apparently were just methods of collecting investor money, with no real hope of return.
Roland Piquepaille, the author of the Slashdot story, is apparently paid to get articles in publications an on blogs. There has never been any information, that I know of, about whether he pays someone at Slashdot or Slashdot's parent company. His Slashdot stories apparently never note Mr. Piquepaille's affiliations with the companies being discussed.
Slashdot has often been scientifically challenged [slashdot.org]. The Slashdot article The Car That Makes Its Own Fuel [slashdot.org] has a +5 moderated First Post that expresses the consensus of the comments on that story.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is active ultrasound (baby monitors, etc.) and passive ultrasound, which relies on picking up sounds produced by whatever processes you're trying to monitor. I agree that large amounts of the acoustic energy produced by biological processes