I strongly agree with solarpower44. The FIRST realtime 3D (or 4D)OCT system was developed by the group at Johns Hopkins using GPU for both OCT image reconstruction (A-scan processing)and volume rendering. While this work uses FPGA for reconstruction and GPU volume rendering. The FPGA method has also been tried before [1,2]. Personally I prefer the GPU method with CUDA since it's the most cost effective approach. The FPGA module should also realize the function but it would cost much more money than a regular GPU.
 T. E. Ustun, N. V. Iftimia, R. D. Ferguson, and D. X. Hammer, “Real-time processing for Fourier domain optical coherence tomography using a field programmable gate array,” Review of Scientific Instruments 79, 114301 (2008).
 A. E. Desjardins, B. J. Vakoc, M. J. Suter, S. H. Yun, G. J. Tearney, B. E. Bouma, “Real-time FPGA processing for high-speed optical frequency domain imaging,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 28, 1468-1472 (2009).
I checked the works cited by solarpower44 because I got interested in. Although they actually showed some real-time OCT, I think it is
insufficient for MEDICAL IMAGING both in the image size and the image penetration depth. It seems this work's designs fit a bit better to target medical use as the title shows.
This is not true.
This is not the first real-time OCT.
Too bad they don't cite other works.
Graphics Processing Unit Accelerated Non-uniform fast Fourier transform for ultrahigh-speed, real-time Fourier-domain OCT,” Opt. Exp., vol. 18, Iss. 22, pp. 23472-23487, Oct., 2010
Real-time 4D signal processing and visualization using graphics processing unit on a regular nonlinear-k Fourier-domain OCT system,” Optics Express, Vol. 18, Issue 11, pp. 11772-11784, 2010
Agreed with SpeedEvil: it is an exciting but largely complementary technology to MRI or PET...I am editing a book on medical imaging for Wiley, looking for someone to write a chapter on OCT, if interested pls email: email@example.com, Kris
MRI is great.
MRI is also hideously expensive.
OCT is potentially a lot cheaper than MRI, with faster scanning, but it does have severe limitations as to the depth of objects it can sense.
It's another tool in the arsenal, not a magic bullet.
well mri is 3D volume, not surface ! also 7T-mri can provide amazing detail with resolution : fraction of the millimeter in voxel size. anatomical scans do not require toxic fluids for contrast etc. and it is noninvasive and safe. bad sides : digestive and respiratory systems are notoriously hard in MRI, though SWIFT seems to mitigate the issue. real-time is challenging due to immense post-processing, though using GPU and distributed-cluster should be a viable option for MRI too.