This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (27)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Thomas H. Milner, MD; Charles D. Maynard, MD; Robert J. Cowan, MD

AMA Arch Surg. 1971;103(3):371-372.

Abstract
A comparison of the sensitivity of detection of metastatic bone disease by the bone scan and skeletal roentgenogram in 100 patients revealed a higher yield from the bone scan alone (86%) than from the roentgenogram alone (73%). In the tumor groups which frequently have osseous metastases (breast, prostate, and lung), the bone scan was greater than 95% accurate. Moreover, in patients with positive findings from both procedures, additional lesions were detected by the scan which were not demonstrated by the roentgenogram in 29%. A significant number of false negatives were encountered with both procedures when the entire group was examined. The greatest yield was obtained by employing both techniques.

Author Affiliations
Winston-Salem, NC

From the Department of Radiology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine of Wake Forest University, and the North Carolina Baptist Hospital, Winston-Salem, NC. Dr. Cowan is a James Picker Scholar in radiological research.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication March 1, 1971.

Reprint requests to Department of Radiology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, S Hawthorne Road, Winston-Salem, NC 27103 (Dr. Cowan).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Clinical Use of Radionuclide Bone Imaging in a University Medical Center
Fihn et al.
JAMA 1982;248:439-442.
ABSTRACT  

Screening for Bone Metastases: Are Only Scans Necessary?
Pistenma et al.
JAMA 1975;231:46-50.
ABSTRACT