6
William Osler, the medical sage of the Johns Hopkins Hospital and Medical School wrote: â€oeIn science, credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not the man to whom the idea first occurs.― This year's Hevesy Nu clear Pioneer awardee, a true son of the Johns Hopkins, is both a person to whom ideas first occur and, especially, one who, in the name of nuclear medicine, convinces the world of their veracity and usefulness. PERSON Henry Nicholas Wagner, Jr., was born in Baltimore, Maryland, on May 12, 1927. He attended Baltimore schools, including Calvert Hall, from which he graduated in 1944. While at Calvert Hall, he developed an interest in medicine, in part through reading about the great fighters against infectious disease, and determined to become a physician. After one year in the Coast Guard Academy, he matriculated in the College of Johns Hopkins University, receiving an A.B. degree (Phi Beta Kappa) in 1948. During the summer following his graduation, he began to work with Dr. Curt Richter, a well-known neuroscientist at the Johns Hopkins Medical School. This research, which extended through three more summers, was concerned with methods for mea suring visual responses in animals and with environ mental influences on central nervous system function. In 1948 Henry entered the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, graduating with an M.D. degree (Alpha Omega Alpha) in 1952. In his third year of medical school he married Anne Barrett, whom he had met three years previously at a scientific meeting when she was a junior at Mt. Saint Agnes College. One year later, their first child (Henry Nicholas III) was born, followed by Mary Randall, John Mark, and Anne Eliz abeth. He joined the Osler Medical Service at the Johns Hopkins Hospital on graduation from medical school, first as an intern and then as an assistant resident. During this period he wrote several papers, stemming from his house-staff experience, on the clinical treatment of in fectious diseases. In 1955, Henry Wagner joined Robert Berliner's group at the NIH as a clinical associate. Among his colleagues there were Eugene Braunwald and Jack Or loff. His work focused on autonomic vasoregulatory in fluences on the kidney, particularly on responses to antidiuretic hormone. Following this, Henry went to the Hammersmith Hospital for a year and worked in the Endocrine Unit under Russell Frazer. Here, through a study of iodine THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE 934 HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE LECTURE HenryN. Wagner,Jr.

Henry Wagner pioneer in nuclear medicine (Henry Wagner)

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

William Osler, the medical sage of the Johns HopkinsHospital and Medical School wrote: “Inscience, creditgoes to the man who convinces the world, not the manto whom the idea first occurs.―This year's Hevesy Nuclear Pioneer awardee, a true son of the Johns Hopkins,is both a person to whom ideas first occur and, especially,one who, in the name of nuclear medicine, convinces theworld of their veracity and usefulness.

PERSON

Henry Nicholas Wagner, Jr., was born in Baltimore,Maryland, on May 12, 1927. He attended Baltimoreschools, including Calvert Hall, from which he graduatedin 1944. While at Calvert Hall, he developed an interestin medicine, in part through reading about the greatfighters against infectious disease, and determined tobecome a physician. After one year in the Coast GuardAcademy, he matriculated in the College of JohnsHopkins University, receiving an A.B. degree (Phi BetaKappa) in 1948. During the summer following hisgraduation, he began to work with Dr. Curt Richter, awell-known neuroscientist at the Johns Hopkins MedicalSchool. This research, which extended through threemore summers, was concerned with methods for mea

suring visual responses in animals and with environmental influences on central nervous system function.In 1948 Henry entered the Johns Hopkins UniversitySchool of Medicine, graduating with an M.D. degree(Alpha Omega Alpha) in 1952. In his third year ofmedical school he married Anne Barrett, whom he hadmet three years previously at a scientific meeting whenshe was a junior at Mt. Saint Agnes College. One yearlater, their first child (Henry Nicholas III) was born,followed by Mary Randall, John Mark, and Anne Elizabeth. He joined the Osler Medical Service at the JohnsHopkins Hospital on graduation from medical school,first as an intern and then as an assistant resident. Duringthis period he wrote several papers, stemming from hishouse-staff experience, on the clinical treatment of infectious diseases.

In 1955, Henry Wagner joined Robert Berliner'sgroup at the NIH as a clinical associate. Among hiscolleagues there were Eugene Braunwald and Jack Orloff. His work focused on autonomic vasoregulatory influences on the kidney, particularly on responses toantidiuretic hormone.

Following this, Henry went to the HammersmithHospital for a year and worked in the Endocrine Unitunder Russell Frazer. Here, through a study of iodine

THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE934

HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE LECTURE

HenryN. Wagner,Jr.

HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE PIONEER LECTURE

metabolism in the thyroid, he first began to use radioactive materials.

Henry returned to the Hopkins the following year asChief Medical Resident on the Osler Medical Service.When asked to join the Hopkins medical faculty, as wascustomary after this assignment, he told A. McGeheeHarvey, then head of the Department of Medicine, thathe wished to work on the application of radionuclides tothe study of clinical problems. Harvey was not particularly enthusiastic about this idea but agreed to providesome space along with a faculty appointment. Henrythus joined John McAfee, who was developing a radioisotope unit at the Johns Hopkins through the Department of Radiology. In 1964 Henry was appointed Physician-in-Charge of the Nuclear Medicine Division atthe Johns Hopkins Hospital. In the following sections,I shall outline the contributions of that Division to research and training in nuclear medicine; I shall also tryto provide an intellectual biography of HenryWagner.

Currently Dr. Wagner is Professor of Medicine, Radiology and Radiologic Science in the School of Mcdicine, and Professor of Environmental Health Sciencesin the School of Hygiene and Public Health at the JohnsHopkins University. At the Johns Hopskins Hospital,he is Director of the Division of Nuclear Medicine,Physician and Radiologist. His honors include the Vikram Surhabel Gold Medal (Society of Nuclear Medicineof India), the Georg von Hevesy medal (in 1976), anda Doctor of Science (Honoris Causa) from WashingtonCollege. His list of memberships and consultantships islong and varied.

CLINICAL SCIENTIST

In examining the considerable body of knowledge thathas emerged from the Johns Hopkins nuclear medicineunit during Henry Wagner's stewardship, I am Struckby the way it parallels the natural history of our discipline over the past two decades. On close inspection it isclear that the Division has both led the field in new directions and helped to elaborate on areas opened up byothers. Thus, I find it impossible to separate clearly itswork (with the considerable imprint that Henry's direction has had on it) from concurrent developments inother clinics and laboratories. Nonetheless, there arecertain areas that bear the Hopkins' stamp and for whichprincipal credit must be given to Henry and his colleagues.

The introduction of renal scintigraphy with Hg-203chlormerodrin by John McAfee and Henry Wagner (1)and extension of the use of the agent for measuring differential renal function by Reba, Wagner, and McAfee(2) were the first of a number of developments in ra

diopharmaceutical science built around established

physiologic and pharmacologic mechanisms—in thiscase, the binding of mercury compounds by renal tubules. This was soon followed by the use of heat-damaged erythrocytes for spleen scanning, based on thespleen's ability to sequester damaged red cells (3). Afterthe introduction of radiopertechnetate for brain Scanningby Paul Harper, the Hopkins group provided the pharmacokinetic rationale for its use (4). They were alsoresponsible in large measure for the introduction of indium-ll3m into clinical practice (5) taking advantage

of its property of binding to transferrin in the first inStance. For the swift detection of pyrogens in locallyprepared radioindicators, we are indebted to their development of the Limulus test (6).

The Hopkins Group has also had a long-standing interest in exploiting techniques for the determination ofregional blood flow, beginning with the demonstration

in man that aggregated albumin particles could be used

to detect pulmonary embolism (7), regional hypoxia (8),and lung cancer (9). They have also used microspheresto study the distribution of cardiac output (10), especially in relation to peripheral vascular (1 1) and congenital heart disease (12). With these methods they havedemonstrated that Paget's disease of bone is not the site

of significant arteriovenous shunting, as was earlier believed (13). They were among the first groups interested

in the use of monovalent cations for imaging regionalmyocardial blood flow (14) and provided experimentalvalidation for the technique using microspheres (15).

In other physiologically based developments, theyintroduced the concept of cystic-duct impatency in acute

cholecystitis (16), the use of radionuclide angiocardiography in cyanotic congenital heart disease (17), andthat of gated cardiac blood-pool studies in the diagnosisof valvular disease of the heart (18). Earlier studies hadexploited the dissociation of regional ventilation andperfusion in pulmonary embolism using radioactive gases(19). Recently they have been pioneers in the use ofspiperone labeled with positron emitters for measuringdopamine receptors in the human brain (20).

In terms of physical techniques and instrumentation,the group has made a number of significant contributions. They were first to demonstrate the utility of pinhole imaging (21 ) and to emphasize the advantage ofvertex views in brain scanning (22). The introduction ofcomputers into nuclear medicine research and practicewas hastened by their concepts of image display and

analysis and the creation of functional images (23). Inthe field of radioassay they have been in the forefront ofautomated radiometric methods for measuring 14CO2,introduced first for the detection of bacterial invasionand later for the assay of vitamins and measurements ofcell metabolism (24). More recently, they have utilized

a simple radiodetector device for the generation of leftventricular time-activity curves that can be used to cal

culate ventricular volumes (25).

Volume 25, Number 8 935

HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE PIONEER LECTURE

From Henry's house-staff days he has had a longstanding interest in infectious disease and its effects onthe organism. In addition to developing methods for theearly detection of bacteria in blood and other body fluids,hehasexploredthereactionsof thereticuloendothelialsystem to infections and endotoxins (26). The Hopkinsgroup also introduced the use of gallum-67 in the detection and localization of abscesses and sarcoid(27,28).

Considering the productivity of the Hopkins' unit overthe past two decades, this sampling is to a great extenttruncated and to some degree capricious. It representsthe view of one admirer, and other views will have adifferent composition and emphasis. Nevertheless, I hopeit conveys a sense of the breadth and thrust of the Division's contributions.

TEACHER AND SPOKESMAN

If Henry Adams is correct that “ateacher affectseternity; he can never tell where his influence stops,―thenHenry Wagner will certainly leave an indelible mark.For there is no practitioner of nuclear medicine who hashad such an accomplished and influential group of students. Nor is there anyone who has brought the learningof nuclear medicine to as many places or fostered collegiality in the field with such zeal.

It would be impossible to list the names and affiliationsof his former residents and fellows,but I have asked someof them to share with you their thoughts on Henry asteacher and mentor. Their words reflect the intensity oftheir experience and the high value they place upon it.

Buzz Nelp writes: “Henry'spersonality is effervescent,his mind is brilliant and his ability to deal with people in

an effective and yet kind way is most impressive. Although I have heard Henry criticize an individual's work,I don't believe I have ever heard Henry say an unkind orderogatory sort of thing about an individual per Se, acharacteristic which I admire.―

From Dick Reba: “Byperpetuating the principles ofthe scientific method in his students, Henry's conceptsabout science, medicine (and) clinical practice willsurvive. Many characteristics of a scientist are commonto Henry: curiosity, common sense, application or a senseof purpose, the power to concentrate, and perseverance—which I would translate to self-discipline or acommitment to pursue excellence—and the ability totolerate frustration as well as the ability to communicate.The fact that he is persuaded by evidence and not byintimidation, that he is determined but not intractable,I believe are all part of the secret of his successes. Withregard to his trainees, I have always been impressed, ashe appears to stimulate them to respond not by demanding discipline and obedience to his precise directionbut rather by the logic and persuasion of personal leadership and close contact, thereby arousing in the trainees

a feeling of caring and involvement and knowing thatHenry is concerned about them and their work.―

And from Don Tow: “Ibelieve that Henry's outstanding contribution to the field of nuclear medicine hasbeen his effectively articulating nuclear medicine toAmerican medicine, and possibly to the world aswell.―

Fred Mishkin writes: “Ihold Henry Wagner in awefor his fertile mind, his invariably incisive way of cuttingto the core of a problem with the right question or observation, and his whirlwind productivity. Scientific

programs are continually and increasingly enriched bycontributions from the investigations of his currenttrainees, which he quietly masterminds. His ability todo this year after year may be in part due to his boyisheagerness in looking for solutions to common problemsand delighting in being the first to find an answer.―

From Frank DeLand: “Whenmy interest in nuclearmedicine became overwhelming, I returned to Hopkinsas one of the fellows in Henry's training program. Therewere quite a few of us, and we all worked diligently withHenry on various projects. Despite the pressure of work,an esprit de corps pervaded the Department, and weenjoyed the long days there. Henry is a demandingmentor, an excellent teacher, and possesses superior intellect. His enthusiasm for nuclear medicine transfersto all who come within his sphere. My association withhim was a time of challenge, fulfillment, and joy, andwith the sustained momentum for achievement and accomplishment that was instilled under his guidance, theyears since have passed all too quickly.―

And from Buck Rhodes: “Ithink Henry's many influences on me are: 1. His four measures for evaluatingscience: (a) Is it clear? (b) Is it true? (c) Is it new? and(d) Is it significant? 2. His ability to see what the simplenext step is in any scientific or medical explanation. 3.His recognition that the absolute best is still imperfect.In summary, Henry is my revered teacher.―

Bill Strauss writes: “Henryis charismatic. As such,I believe that his major contributions come from stimulating others with incisive but creative criticism of theirideas and from offering sage counsel. When Henrywould tell you an idea was no good, he wouldn't leave youwith no idea. He would talk to you until a new conceptemerged to replace the one that was shot down. He established a training program in nuclear medicine thathad both clinical training and investigative excellenceas its hallmark. This model has been emulated by hisformer trainees in their programs, and therefore hasserved to set the standard for the level of nuclear mcdicine practice throughout the world.―

From Frank Castronovo: “Henrygave everyone theimpression (and correctly so) that he was thinking oftheir project. Henry kept the Hopkins faculty togetherand we all gave a little extra because he did. His love ofall people and his willingness to share his intellect make

936 THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE

HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE PIONEER LECTURE

listened as intently to the lowliest medical student as hedid to the most distinguished professors. Basically it wasthe idea that was of paramount importance to him, andhe learned from everyone, incorporating first ideas intohis own thinking, shaping these inputs in a creative wayto obtain new insights in the field.―

And, lastly, from Phil Alderson: “Henry'sabilities asa teacher are not in the conveyance of specific facts, butin his approach to problems. Henry doesn't teach thestudent what can really be found in books, but rather. . .how to think about problems. Henry's consistentskepticism about new techniques (especially those suggested by others) forces him and all his colleagues intoa persistently active academic posture. To his credit, heseems willing to accept final and well-controlled facts,even when they don't agree with his own hypotheses.―

In addition to the contributions he has made to thetraining of nuclear medicine specialists in NorthAmerica, Henry Wagner substantially aided the devel

opment of nuclear medicine abroad by accepting a largenumber of fellows and visitors into his Division. One canscarcely visit a country—in the first world or thirdwithout encountering a colleague who has spent sometime in the Hopkins unit. And from some countries, suchas Japan, they have come in flocks.

As his former students have testified, Henry has alsobeen a world traveller, bringing the message of nuclearmedicine everywhere that he goes. His enthusiasm isinfectious and his exposition of the relation of nuclearmedicine to medicine in general so clear that it attractsthose in and out of the specialty. As a result, he has

served a number of organizations with distinction:President of the American Federation for Clinical Research, President and Vice President of the Society ofNuclear Medicine, Founding Member and Vice Presi

dent of the American Board of Nuclear Medicine,President of the World Federation of Nuclear Medicineand Biology, President of the Johns Hopkins MedicalSociety, and President of the Baltimore City MedicalSociety.

THINKER

I have tried in the previous sections to present a portrait of Henry Wagner as clinical scientist, teacher, andspokesman. In this final section, I shall try to probe thosehabits of mind that illuminate these aspects of hischaracter.

I would guess that the general nuclear medicinecommunity thinks of Henry as the great advocate of thethesis that nuclear medicine provides functional information not otherwise readily available about sick people.

This emphasis on function, and especially regionalfunction, has become Henry's hallmark. We have heardhim talk of “Nuclear Medicine in Motion― and of

“functional images.― He has told us that “functions are

him truly unique in a profession often plagued by sdfishness and jealousy.―

And from Mike Siegel: “Theannual Hopkins alumniparty is like a “who'swho in nuclear medicine.― Ofcourse, some credit is due to the “who's―but much of thescientific, administrative training was inspired by Henry.More than anything (he) was the father figure who wasthere to support and guide staff and fellows, with a sixthsense, unique to Henry, as to what goals to pursue.―

Ken McKusick writes: “Thereare many traits ofHenry which came through during my several years at

Hopkins. One was his dedication to the teaching of thefellows. He surely is a spokesman (for the nuclearmedicine world), articulate, humorous, gracious, at easein all environments and with an infectious curiosity.―

From Phil Bardfeld: “Asa teacher his style has beena dynamic optimism, tempered with a down-to-earthpragmatism. Henry Wagner's style as an investigatorhas been characterized by a vigorous integrity and anability to get to the heart of the matter, and by a closesupervision of those who were performing research forhim.―

And from Malcolm Cooper: “Myperspective ofHenry is of a man who committed himself almost totally

. to furthering the cause of nuclear medicine. He has

fostered its role as a clinical scientific discipline, enablingit to stand legitimately alongside other medical subspecialties. Perhaps his greatest contribution is the influence he has had upon the young people who came totrain under him at Hopkins. To some degree it was aself-selective process, but once in, he set standards thatinfluenced and moved people to a level of expertise witha faculty for critical enquiry that usually never leftthem.―

Bill Klingensmith writes: “Ithink he has attracted (a)large number of trainees because of his dedication toresearch and the principles of research, and because ofhis wit and sense of humor.―

From Leon Malmud: “IfI had to list Henry's outstanding contributions to the field of nuclear medicine,I would focus on one, and that is his youthful, infectiousenthusiasm for what is new and his determination tore-evaluate that which is old by “stompingout myths.―He transmits that feeling to his trainees, for whom heserves as an excellent role model and teacher.―

And from Steve Larson: “Heis one of a handful ofindividuals whose personalities have palpably affectedthe discipline of nuclear medicine: through his studentsand fellows, his worldwide influence has been enormous.To me, for example, nuclear medicine has been given amuch richer texture because of the principles which hehas taught me. Henry is a magnificent teacher, and I willalways feel indebted to him for this. So much so that I

am reminded of him every day as I teach my own students and residents. He listened intently to everyone, nomatter what their status in the medical hierarchy. He

Volume 25, Number 8 937

HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE PIONEER LECTURE

fast processes of short duration,―while “structuresareslow processes of long duration―and that while otherimaging disciplines provide the “nouns,nuclear medicineprovides the verbs.―

Henry himself believes that the corpus of his work isorganized around the role of the autonomic nervoussystem in maintaining homeostasis; his scientific heroesare Claude Bernard and Walter Cannon. Certainly it iseasy to see these influences in his early work on environmental stress and on the role of autonomic vasoregulatory reflexes in the kidney. They are present in hisstudies on the distribution of blood flow in shock, on theeffects of hypoxia on the regional pulmonary circulations, on the control of blood flow in the extremities bythe autonomic nerves, on the hemodynamic effects ofstatic and dynamic stress, and in his most recent workon CNS receptors. He also believes that threadingthrough his scientific career is an interest in infectiousdiseases, kindled by his reading of Paul de Kruifas a ladand nurtured by his experiences on the Hopkins wardservices. This interest also shows up in his work on endotoxins and the RE system, on radiometric detection,and on gallium scanning.

My own view is that Henry is basically a troublemaker. Lest that declarative statement lead you tobelieve I am unfit to deliver this commemorative lecture,I would remind you that constructive troublemakers arenecessary to the full and critical development of scienceand to the building of a free society as well.

Henry's proclivity for troublemaking expresses itselfin various ways. Sometimes it is mischievous fun-poking,as in the last time we went out to dinner together and hethreatened to tell the waitress that his name was Henryand that he was going to be her customer for the evening,etc., etc. Despite the potential hilarity of the situation,Anne Wagner's intervention kept him from pulling itoff—whichreminds me that Anne is a gracious and effective partner to Henry, at times keeping his spiritedbehavior within bounds. Today's award must be considered partly hers as well.

I have been told that Henry was instrumental in theracial integration of the Osler Service at the Hopkins.If this is so, I would wager that some considered him atroublemaker in that affair as well. Others, I am certain,welcomed his courage in doing the right thing. Certainly,Henry is provocative—ask his many friends and colleagues, the corporators of the World Federation ofNuclear Medicine and Biology, and the founders of theAmerican Board of Nuclear Medicine, for example. Buthe is provocative with a purpose, and the pots he stirs aregenerally good eating.

I have wondered as to the source of this attribute inHenry—not Calvert Hall, where he must have been sethigh expectations and the concepts of service to familyand community; not the Hopkins, with its devotion tohigher learning in medicine; nor the National Institutes

of Health, where he learned the rigors of clinical investigation. I conclude that it is pure Henry—probablycongenital. I also think that many admire this talent fortroublemaking—a few may be a little envious, since ittakes gumption and an imagination that many of us donot possess. Some of us are very fond of him because ofit—others, despite it.

REFERENCES

S.JAMESADELSTEINHarvard Medical SchoolBoston, Massachusetts

I. MCAFEE JG, WAGNER HN: Visualization of renal parenchyma by scintiscanning with Hg203 neohydrin. Radiology75:820—821,1960

2. REBARC,WAGNERHN, MCAFEEJG: MeasurementofHg203 chlormerodrin accumulation by the kidneys for detection of unilateral renal disease. Radiology 79:134-135,I962

3. WINKELMAN JW, WAGNER HN, MCAFEE JG et al: Visualization of the spleen in man by radioisotope scanning.Radiology 75:465-466, 1960

4. MCAFEE JG, FUEGER CF. STERN HS, et al: Tc-99m pertechnetate for brain scanning. J Nucl Med 5:811—827,1964

5. STERN HS, GOODWIN D, WAGNER HN JR, et al: In113m—a short-lived isotope for lung scanning. Nucleonics24:57—59,1966

6. COOPERJF,LEVINJ,WAGNERHN: Quantitativecornparisonof in vitroand in vivomethodsfor the detectionofendotoxin.J Lab ClinMed 78:138-148,1971

7. WAGNERHN, SABISTONDC, ho M, etaI: Regionalpulmonary blood flowin man by radioisotope scanning. JAMA187:601-603,1964

8. LOPEZ-MAJANO V, WAGNER HN, TWINING RH, et al:Effect of regional hypoxia on the distribution of pulmonaryblood flow in man. Circ Res 18:550—557,1966

9. WAGNER HN, LOPEZ-MAJANO V, Tow D, Ct al: Radioisotope scanning of lungs in early diagnosis of bronchogeniccarcinoma. Lance! 1:344, 1965

10. KAIHARA S, VAN HEERDENPD, MIGITA T, Ctal: Measurement of distribution of cardiac output. J Appl Physiol25:696-700, 1968

11. SIEGEL ME, GIARGIANA FA, RHODES BA, et al: Effectof reactive hyperemia on the distribution of radioactive microspheres in patients with peripheral vascular disease. AmJ RoenigenolRad TiterNuclMed 118:814-819,1973

/2. STRAUSSHW, HURLEY PJ,RHODESBA, et al: Quantification of right-to-left transpulmonary shunts in man. J LabClin Med 74:597-607, 1969

13. RHoDESBA, GREYSONND, HAMILTONCR, et al: Absence of anatomic arteriovenous shunts in Paget's disease ofbone.N EngIJ Med 287:686-689,1972

14. HURLEYPJ,COOPERM, REBARC, et al: 43KC1:A newradiopharmaceutical for imaging the heart. J Nucl Med12:516—519,1971

15. PROKOP EK, STRAUSS HW, SHAW J, et al: Comparisonof regional myocardial perfusion determined by ionic potassium-43 to that determined by microspheres. Circulation50:978-984, 1974

16. EIKMANEA, CAMERONJL, COLMANM, etal: A testforpatency of the cystic duct in acute cholecystitis. Ann InternMed 82:318—322,1975

938 THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE

HEVESY NUCLEAR MEDICINE PIONEER LECTURE

/7. HURLEYPJ,STRAUSSHW, WAGNERHN JR: Radionuclide angiocardiography in cyanotic congenital heart disease.JohnsHopkinsMedf 127:46-54,1970

18. RIG0 P, ALDERSON P0, ROBERTSONRM, et al: Measurement of aortic and mitral regurgitation by gated cardiacblood pool scans. Circulation 60:306-3 12, 1979

19. WAGNER HN, LOPEZ-MAJANO V, LANGAN JK, et al:Radioactive xenon in the differential diagnosis of pulmonaryembolism.Radiology91:1168-1174,1968

20. WAGNERHN, BURNSHD, DANNALSRF,etal: Imagingdopamine receptors in the human brain by positron tomography.Science221:1264-1266,1983

21. QUINLAN MF, WAGNER HN: Lung imaging with thepinhole Anger camera. J Nuci Med 9:497-498, 1968

22. HOLMESRA, HERRONCS,WAGNERHN: A modifiedvertex view in brain scanning. Radiology 88:498-503,I967

23. NATARAJANTK, WAGNERHN: A newimagedisplayand

analysis system (IDA) for radionuclide imaging. Radiology93:823—827,1969

24. DELAND FH, WAGNER HN: Automated radiometric detection of bacterial growth in blood cultures. I Lab Clin Med75:529—534,1970

25. WAGNER HN, WAKE R, NICKOLOFFE, et al: The nuclearstethoscope:a simpledeviceforgenerationof leftventricularvolume curves. Am J Cardiol 38:747-750, 1976

26. GREISMAN SE, WAGNER HN, 110 M, et al: Mechanismsof endotoxin tolerance. II. Relationship between endotoxintolerance and reticuloendothelial system phagocytic activityinman.JExpMed 119:241-264,1964

27. LOMAS F, WAGNER HN: Accumulation of ionic 67Gainempyema of the gallbladder. Radiology 105:689-692,I972

28. MCKUSICKKA, S0IN JS, GHILADI A, et al: Gallium 67accumulationin pulmonarysarcoiduis. JAMA 223:688-690,I973

Volume 25, Number 8 939