AJR AJR-based Continuing Ed for Technologists
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by STEWART, H. R.
Right arrow Articles by BEST, E. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by STEWART, H. R.
Right arrow Articles by BEST, E. B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 104, 686-691, Copyright © 1968 by American Roentgen Ray Society

PRACTICAL INFERENCES FROM STUDIES WITH A "BREATHING" LIVER PHANTOM

HOWARD R. STEWART M.D.1 and EDWARD B. BEST M.D.2

1 Department of Radiology, Methodist Hospital, Lubbock, Texas
2 Staff Member, Department of Radiology and Radioactive Isotopes, Scott and White Memorial Hospital, Temple, Texas

A simple and inexpensive liver phantom capable of simulating respiratory motion was constructed from materials readily available in most radioisotope laboratories and radiology departments. The effects of motion on liver scanning were studied simulating conditions in the adult human as closely as possible in regards to technical and physical factors as well as the type of radionuclide and dosage used. It is felt that these studies have shown: (1) that the indentations (picket fence effect) noted at the margins of the liver are due to the combined effects of respiratory movement of the liver and rectilinear movement of the conventional scanner; (2) that counting rates and thereby the efficiency of the detector are affected by this motion; and (3) that the smallest nodule detectable in a motionless phantom will not be seen at all when a motion similar to human diaphragmatic excursion is added.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1968 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.