Volume 44, Number 1
January 2014
Letter From the Editors
A
s we begin our 44th year of continuous publication, we enter an area of nuclear medicine that has not been explored directly. We are delighted to present an issue devoted to Veterinary Nuclear Medicine. We dealt with animals in previous issues, but only as research subjects, not as patients. To help us achieve this goal, we are very fortunate to have attracted Dr Gregory B. Daniel of Virginia Tech University, to serve as guest editor. In the guest editorial, Dr Daniel provides us with a detailed history of how the use of radionuclide methodology evolved in veterinary medicine, particularly in the past 2 decades. Regulatory concerns are reviewed as well. Interestingly, Dr Daniel points out that veterinary patients are handled very conservatively as if they were radioactive materials. They must be confined to some form of isolation until their radiation burden falls to an allowable limit that is generally lower than the limit used in humans, at which time they can be returned to their normal environment. There are additional requirements for monitoring the stall or cage that the animal occupied. The differences in terminology and nomenclature describing body parts and position in animals compared with what we are used to dealing with in humans are interesting. Dr Daniel uses both a schematic drawing and a comparative table to highlight these differences. It certainly is both of great interest and gratifying to see how the tools that we are so familiar with are effectively
0001-2998/14/$ - see front matter & 2014 Published by Elsevier Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2013.10.001
used by our colleagues involved in both the diagnosis and treatment of animal disorders. One of us (L.M.F.) was initially surprised when he learned that a veterinary radiology residency was 4 years. After further thought, it should not have been surprising at all. We human physicians only have to learn about 1 organism and the diseases it is subject to. Veterinarians have to learn about many different animals and their disorders. M.D.B., the other editor, was exposed to this during a fascinating and informative visit to the Bronx facility of the Wildlife Conservations Society about 15 years ago. Dr Robert Cook, the chief veterinarian of the organization took him on a personal tour of the animal hospital there (the Bronx Zoo). Several animals ranging from snakes to big cats were hospitalized at the time. Dr Cook discussed the wide-ranging differences in physiology between species. Back then he was using radiographic technics but had no nuclear medicine capability. It is gratifying to see how this capability has come into its own and grown over the years. We are greatly indebted to Dr Daniel and the several colleagues he has enlisted to provide this wonderful exposure to veterinary nuclear medicine. It should prove to be both enjoyable and educational. Leonard M. Freeman, MD M. Donald Blaufox, MD, PhD
1
January 2014
Letter From the Editors
A
s we begin our 44th year of continuous publication, we enter an area of nuclear medicine that has not been explored directly. We are delighted to present an issue devoted to Veterinary Nuclear Medicine. We dealt with animals in previous issues, but only as research subjects, not as patients. To help us achieve this goal, we are very fortunate to have attracted Dr Gregory B. Daniel of Virginia Tech University, to serve as guest editor. In the guest editorial, Dr Daniel provides us with a detailed history of how the use of radionuclide methodology evolved in veterinary medicine, particularly in the past 2 decades. Regulatory concerns are reviewed as well. Interestingly, Dr Daniel points out that veterinary patients are handled very conservatively as if they were radioactive materials. They must be confined to some form of isolation until their radiation burden falls to an allowable limit that is generally lower than the limit used in humans, at which time they can be returned to their normal environment. There are additional requirements for monitoring the stall or cage that the animal occupied. The differences in terminology and nomenclature describing body parts and position in animals compared with what we are used to dealing with in humans are interesting. Dr Daniel uses both a schematic drawing and a comparative table to highlight these differences. It certainly is both of great interest and gratifying to see how the tools that we are so familiar with are effectively
0001-2998/14/$ - see front matter & 2014 Published by Elsevier Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2013.10.001
used by our colleagues involved in both the diagnosis and treatment of animal disorders. One of us (L.M.F.) was initially surprised when he learned that a veterinary radiology residency was 4 years. After further thought, it should not have been surprising at all. We human physicians only have to learn about 1 organism and the diseases it is subject to. Veterinarians have to learn about many different animals and their disorders. M.D.B., the other editor, was exposed to this during a fascinating and informative visit to the Bronx facility of the Wildlife Conservations Society about 15 years ago. Dr Robert Cook, the chief veterinarian of the organization took him on a personal tour of the animal hospital there (the Bronx Zoo). Several animals ranging from snakes to big cats were hospitalized at the time. Dr Cook discussed the wide-ranging differences in physiology between species. Back then he was using radiographic technics but had no nuclear medicine capability. It is gratifying to see how this capability has come into its own and grown over the years. We are greatly indebted to Dr Daniel and the several colleagues he has enlisted to provide this wonderful exposure to veterinary nuclear medicine. It should prove to be both enjoyable and educational. Leonard M. Freeman, MD M. Donald Blaufox, MD, PhD
1
