Altgough the authors mention all types, the section of the article on cost relates to a 60-70cm FOV. This is indeed double the SAFOV at 30cm - and they are suggesting that the cost may therefore be double that of a 30cm.
But note that, they are proposing this as a compromise, in order to mitigate cost. That is all well and fine.
HOWEVER! a) Is that the scanner we are discussing? b) Is that the scanner with the10 minute time stamp? c) Is that the scanner that detected a 2mm lesion using a Gallium tracer?
I think its a NO on all questions. The debate is about the QUADRA (107cm) and uEXPLORER (194cm). They cost AU$13million. Its unaffordable for most clinics, except for the large research centres with large amounts of grant funding. Hence, the reason they are being regerred to a research tools.
CU6 Price at posting:
$4.00 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)