The rise and fall of a radiologic technique

As young radiologists read the slightly self-satisfied articles celebrating the centennial of radiology, they may conclude that the course of radiology and all its components has been smoothly upward, without hesitations, false starts, or disappointments. Older radiologists know better. The replacement of a less satisfactory technique with a better one is a gain for both patients and physicians, but the replacement process itself can be distressing. Much of what radiology residents learned in the 1950s and 1960s is no longer of any use. Who now employs pneumoencephalography or intravenous cholangiography? Entire books were once written about these procedures [1, 2]. Who can now credit the reliance once placed on positive-contrast maxillary antrography [3]? Few have even heard of eustachian tubography [4]. Radiologists who tried to make a career using those techniques learned to their sorrow that although anatomy is permanent and diseases change only slowly, techniques are often ephemeral. Total body opacification, a technique once of consuming interest to the present writers [5-7], is an illustration of this.