[Skip to Navigation]
October 1961


Author Affiliations

Jyväskylä, Keskussairaala Finland

Arch Ophthalmol. 1961;66(4):605-606. doi:10.1001/archopht.1961.00960010607026

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


The Correspondence Section welcomes inquiries and comments of a general or specific nature. The Editors may try to answer some of the questions, but more valuable will be answers volunteered by others who have had especial experience related to the questions posed.

To the Editor:  —Our attention has been directed to an article by Dr. G. Baum and Mr. I. Greenwood, in the Archives of Ophthalmology (65:353, 1961), entitled "A Critique of Time-Amplitude Ultrasonography."We have read with interest the publications of Dr. Baum and Mr. Greenwood in which they describe the intensity modulation ultrasonography (IMU) system. Although IMU is to be considered theoretically and in some cases also in practice as a better method than the time-amplitude ultrasonography (TAU) used by ourselves, we have been unable to adopt the IMU method for the following reasons. IMU requires such an expensive and complicated equipment that its purchase, use, and servicing

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
Add or change institution