|
Volumn 46, Issue 12, 2005, Pages 2119-2120
|
Tomographic imaging in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: Still, we do not know [3]
|
Author keywords
[No Author keywords available]
|
Indexed keywords
D DIMER;
TECHNETIUM 99M;
DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;
RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;
AEROSOL;
CLINICAL TRIAL;
COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY;
DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY;
DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS;
FOLLOW UP;
HUMAN;
INTERMETHOD COMPARISON;
LETTER;
LUNG ANGIOGRAPHY;
LUNG EMBOLISM;
LUNG SCINTISCANNING;
OUTCOME ASSESSMENT;
PRIORITY JOURNAL;
SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;
SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY;
TISSUE PERFUSION;
COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS;
COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY;
LUNG VENTILATION PERFUSION RATIO;
METHODOLOGY;
NOTE;
RADIOGRAPHY;
REPRODUCIBILITY;
SCINTISCANNING;
SPIRAL COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY;
HUMANS;
IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;
PULMONARY EMBOLISM;
RADIONUCLIDE IMAGING;
RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS;
REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;
SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;
TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED, SINGLE-PHOTON;
TOMOGRAPHY, SPIRAL COMPUTED;
TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;
VENTILATION-PERFUSION RATIO;
|
EID: 33644876363
PISSN: 01615505
EISSN: None
Source Type: Journal
DOI: None Document Type: Letter |
Times cited : (14)
|
References (5)
|