|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Special Contribution |
1 Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota; 2 Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Stanford University Hospital and Clinics, Stanford, California; and 3 Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: James C. Sisson, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Hospital B1 G505D, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0028. E-mail: jsisson{at}umich.edu
We take issue with the stance that postoperative radioiodine remnant ablation should be applied ubiquitously as adjuvant therapy in patients with well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma. In this article, we state the reasons that we believe a compelling case can be made against ablation in most patients.
Key Words: endocrinology oncology radionuclide therapy ablation radioiodine thyroid carcinoma
COPYRIGHT © 2008 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.
Related articles in JNM:
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE |