Abstract
This introduction outlines what this book is about and just as importantly what it is NOT about. The fact is, if you want to stay up to date in medicine, you cannot avoid PET/CT. This discipline is exploding at the moment with new scanners being placed in hospitals all over the United States and throughout Europe. You can run but you can’t hide from the impact this new technology is making, particularly within oncology but increasingly in many other medical disciplines.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Chapter 1
Beuthien-Baumann B, Hamacher K, Oberdorfer F, Steinbach J. Preparation of fluorine-18 labeled sugars and derivatives and their application as tracer for positron emission-tomography. Carbohydr Res 2000;327:107–118.
Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1369–1379.
Cook GJ, Fogelman I, Maisey MN. Normal physiological and benign pathological variants of 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron-emission tomography scanning: potential for error in interpretation. Semin Nucl Med 1996;26(4):308–314.
Cook GJ, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Normal variants, artefacts and interpretative pitfalls in PET imaging with 18-flouro-2-deoxyglucose and carbon-11 methionine. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26(10):1363–1378.
Fowler JS, Ido T. Initial and subsequent approach for the synthesis of 18FDG. Semin Nucl Med 2002;32:6–12.
Gordon BA, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F. Whole body positron emission tomography: normal variations, pitfalls and technical considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169(6):1675–1680.
Gorospe L, Raman S, Echeveste J, et al. Spectrum of physiological variants, artefacts, and interpretative pitfalls in cancer patients. Nucl Med Commum 2005;26(8):671–687.
Hoffman EJ, Phelps ME. Positron emission tomography: principles and quantitation. New York: Raven Press; 1986: pp 237–286.
Keyes JW Jr. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995;36:1836–1839.
Cherry SR, Sorenson JA, Phelps ME. Physics in Nuclear Medicine, 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2003.
Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL. Pitfalls in oncological diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: physiological and benign variants. Radiographics 1999;19(1):61–77.
Thie JA. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1431–1434.
Warburg O, et al. The metabolism of cancer cells. Biochem Zeitschr 1924;152:129–169.
Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues with FDG: variation with body weight and method for correction. Radiology 1993;189(3):847–850.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag London Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(2007). Introduction. In: PET/CT in Clinical Practice. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-504-2_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-504-2_1
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-430-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-504-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)