 |
|
Confocal Scanning Laser Reflectance Microscopy
Why Bother?
Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:212-215.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
Technology is a gift of God. After the gift of life it is perhaps the greatest of God’s gifts. It is the mother of civilizations, of arts, and of sciences.1
Freeman Dyson, physicist (1923–)
The ability to noninvasively visualize the body’s organs in vivo at the macroscopic and microscopic levels has been a goal of clinicians and researchers alike for more than a century. In recent decades, enormous strides have been made in macroscopic and functional in vivo imaging with the development and refinement of computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography technologies, just to name a few. The impetus to continuously improve existing technologies and to invent new imaging modalities lies in the potential of these technologies to empower physicians to detect subclinical life-threatening disease and to less invasively diagnose clinically evident disease. Today, we take for granted the availability of sophisticated imaging modalities such as computed . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Ashfaq A. Marghoob, MD;
Allan C. Halpern, MD
RELATED ARTICLE
Microscopic In Vivo Description of Cellular Architecture of Dermoscopic Pigment Network in Nevi and Melanomas
Giovanni Pellacani, Anna Maria Cesinaro, Caterina Longo, Costantino Grana, and Stefania Seidenari
Arch Dermatol. 2005;141(2):147-154.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Confocal Laser Scanning Reflectance Microscopy and the Ricky Nelson Phenomenon
Lieblich
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:1318-1319.
FULL TEXT
Biotechnology Succeeds in Revolutionizing Medical Science
Robinson and Callen
Arch Dermatol 2005;141:133-134.
FULL TEXT
|
