Any Publications Comparing Dr Potter 3T MRI to Filler's MRN?

[shawnmellis]

Hi, I am considering whether to get a pelvic Dr. Filler MRN or a 3T Tesla Dr. Potter MRI to find the exact location of my PNE. I can not really find any information anywhere that compares the two different types of diagnostic imaging in finding pudendal nerve entrapment. From what I have seen, it looks as though the MRN is good at seeing PNE but I was wondering if anybody has any proof or studies that Dr. Potter's 3T MRI is better than the MRN for finding PNE because I can't seem to find any? I have seen people post some results of their Dr. Potter MRI, but nobody has said anything about the MRN? I know the MRN is more expensive and I think insurance might not cover it but it does cover MRIs. The MRN may actually be better than Dr. Potter's MRI, but I have no information that compares the two. I was given the following information below from Dr. Filler's MRN office but do not have any published peer review studies comparing the two methods yet:

"I wanted to take time to clarify the difference between MR Neurography and 3T MRI. Many patients are often confused or do not fully understand the difference between MR Neurography and 3T MRI. In the case of soft tissue injury and nerve imaging outside of the spinal column, bigger is not necessarily better. You have to consider the issue of what you are trying to accomplish with MRI scanning. Yes, 3T is a higher Tesla magnet however it is the very speed and added strength of the magnet which makes nerve details more difficult to see on these types of scanners. Faster is actually not conducive to nerve imaging, so if you are trying to distinguish between soft tissue elements and find out if there are impinged nerve roots adjacent to disc space, if there are entrapped nerve branches, if there is scar tissue encapsulating the nerve, or muscle anomaly that is restricting nerve function, then MR Neurography is the best for deducing these diagnostic factors"

Thanks
Shawn