The Accomplishments and Legacy of Saul Hertz, MD.

The early history of the use of radioactive iodine (RAI) is complicated and interesting, and also difficult to discover, especially since several histories have presented inaccurate content. This article is a comprehensive review of the accomplishments of Saul Hertz. Extensive use of primary-source verification has clarified several issues, including the question of whether Hertz alone conceived and asked the pivotal question: "Could iodine be made radioactive artificially?"; on what date RAI was first used to treat hyperthyroidism; and why 2 articles on the first use of RAI for treatment of hyperthyroidism, from 2 different sets of authors from the same department of the same institution, appeared adjacent to each other in the same issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1946. Our review also chronicles several major challenges that Hertz overcame to produce his pivotal work. Hertz was clearly the originator and a visionary of RAI therapy in benign and malignant thyroid disease. We believe he can be considered one of the fathers of nuclear medicine. Hertz's paradigm-changing work was a pivotal medical discovery of the 20th century. The legacy of Hertz continues while the application of RAI therapy continues to evolve. RAI therapy remains the preferred treatment in most situations for autonomous nodules and toxic multinodular goiter and remains a safe and effective treatment for Graves disease after more than 80 y of global clinical use. RAI treatment of differentiated thyroid cancer remains a first-line treatment for most patients after surgery, especially for those with intermediate- or high-risk disease.

A Critical Assessment of the Linear No-Threshold Hypothesis: Its Validity and Applicability for Use in Risk Assessment and Radiation Protection.

The Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging convened a task group to examine the evidence for the risk of carcinogenesis from low-dose radiation exposure and to assess evidence in the scientific literature related to the overall validity of the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis and its applicability for use in risk assessment and radiation protection. In the low-dose and dose-rate region, the group concluded that the LNT hypothesis is invalid as it is not supported by the available scientific evidence and, instead, is actually refuted by published epidemiology and radiation biology. The task group concluded that the evidence does not support the use of LNT either for risk assessment or radiation protection in the low-dose and dose-rate region.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Shoulder Pain-Traumatic.

Traumatic shoulder pain is pain directly attributed to a traumatic event, either acute or chronic. This pain may be the result of either fracture (the clavicle, scapula, or proximal humerus) or soft-tissue injury (most commonly of the rotator cuff, acromioclavicular ligaments, or labroligamentous complex). Imaging assessment of traumatic shoulder pain begins with conventional radiography and, depending on physical examination findings, will require MRI or MR arthrography for assessment of soft-tissue injuries and CT for delineation of fracture planes. Ultrasound excels in assessment of rotator cuff injuries but has limited usefulness for assessment of the deep soft-tissues. CT angiography and conventional arteriography are helpful for assessment of vascular injury, and bone scintigraphy can be used in assessment of complex regional pain syndrome after traumatic shoulder injury. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

The BEIR VII Estimates of Low-Dose Radiation Health Risks Are Based on Faulty Assumptions and Data Analyses: A Call for Reassessment.

The 2006 National Academy of Sciences Biologic Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII report is a well-recognized and frequently cited source on the legitimacy of the linear no-threshold (LNT) model-a model entailing a linear and causal relationship between ionizing radiation and human cancer risk. Linearity means that all radiation causes cancer and explicitly excludes a threshold below which radiogenic cancer risk disappears. However, the BEIR VII committee has erred in the interpretation of its selected literature; specifically, the in vitro data quoted fail to support LNT. Moreover, in vitro data cannot be considered as definitive proof of cancer development in intact organisms. This review is presented to stimulate a critical reevaluation by a BEIR VIII committee to reassess the validity, and use, of LNT and its derived policies.