-transparent.png){kind=logo}
A clinical study comparing the relative sensitivities of computed tomography, skull radiography, and radionuclide scanning in the detection of skull metastases indicated that CT was the least sensitive of these three modalities. CT could however detect a majority of lesions if scans were viewed at appropriate window settings. Phantom studies showed that the limitations of CT can be related to limited spatial resolution, the density of the lesions, partial volume averaging, and plane of section.
Related Publications
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
May 1977,
AJR. American journal of roentgenology,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
January 1982,
Radiology,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
September 1984,
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
December 1978,
The Journal of computed tomography,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
July 1977,
Journal of computer assisted tomography,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
February 1980,
New York state journal of medicine,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
July 2007,
Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
January 2012,
Journal of thoracic imaging,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
April 2013,
Journal of the South African Veterinary Association,
H Becker, and
D Norman, and
D P Boyd, and
R S Hattner, and
T H Newton
January 1994,
Oncology,
