When available, state of the art noninvasive localization studies should be utilized routinely in previously unexplored patients for localizing parathyroid pathology, even when exceptional surgical experience exists. These studies can both minimize the 3 to 20% incidence of missed pathology and promote an approach of limited neck exploration with consequent lowering of morbidity, complications, and costs. Choice of imaging modalities for localizing these small masses is largely dependent on the level of state of the art of available equipment, the interest and experience of the performing physicians, and the attention to technical detail for each of the modalities at an individual institution. In choosing a single test, CT, and most recently cine CT with three-dimensional modeling, is favored because of higher probability of providing the kinds of information most useful to the surgeon. This includes precise anatomic localization and identification of locations likely to be missed by the surgeon (such as mediastinum, deep neck) and the capability for predicting multiple gland disease, for detecting smaller lesions, and for lower incidence of false-positive results. Ultrasound is attractive because of the low cost and noninvasiveness, and it is particularly sensitive in the thyroid region and upper neck. In difficult cases, CT, cine CT, and ultrasound may be augmented by needle aspiration of fluid for PTH assay. Thallium-technetium scanning and MRI are useful alternatives. In the previously explored patient and in patients with difficult diagnostic problems (such as ectopic adenoma, parathyroid carcinoma), the use of multiple noninvasive studies is strongly recommended, preferably CT (particularly, cine CT with three-dimensional imaging) and isotope scanning or MRI. The concurrence of two or more of these studies has a relatively high predictive value (82 to 88%) for localization. However, highly selective venous catheterization and selective magnification arteriography remain the most accurate modalities in these patients (91 to 95% sensitivity with few false-positive results) and may be combined with interventional radiologic techniques for tumor ablation in selected patients without compromising subsequent surgical alternatives. Stereotactic ablation techniques are in development.