AJR Join ARRS
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 QUINN, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by QUINN, J. L., III
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?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 105, 251-259, Copyright © 1969 by American Roentgen Ray Society

THE LUNG: THE CHALLENGE OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE

JAMES LELAND QUINN III 1

1 Professor of Radiology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois

The technology which brought us lung scanning challenges our ability to properly use the procedure in uncovering our ignorance, reshaping our thoughts and translating them to better patient care.

Lung scanning represents a challenge to Nuclear Medicine on several fronts. It is a challenge to ourselves to become expert in the current knowledge of pulmonary pathophysiology. It is refreshing, although rare, to see pulmonary basic science discussed adequately in articles on lung scanning. A further challenge is for us to improve our diagnostic technique at all levels. Our radiopharmaceutical preparation is far from ideal. We need better quality control of particle size, perhaps through the recently discovered metabolizable microspheres to which radionuclides are adsorbed;18 and an improvement of our detecting crystals, replacing the tried, tested, satisfactory but not ideal sodium iodide. Encouraging work on lead fluoride crystals may be a part of our much needed instrument break-through. The penchance for camera versus scanner dialogue should be very quickly brought to an end and a clear definition of the advantages one to the other should be stated, accepted and applied. Uniformity of read-out should be sought. Scanning is still in that unmanageable infant state where one laboratory finds the interpretation of another laboratory's scanning unacceptable.

The final challenge is in the area of communication: communication not only with a medical colleague in other clinical disciplines, but also our colleagues in the physical science disciplines through common colloquia, comparing information with information.

If we are not responsive to these challenges, we will deserve the severe admonition which Marshall McLuhan refers to as ". . . the witless repetitive response to the unperceived," or, at best, the gentle exclamation Dr. Hampton would occasionally make to his residents, "How can you be so ignorant!"


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 © 1969 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.