Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
I know this is late, but still good for others cross-referencing this term. As one critic notes, a "fluoroscope" is not typical of a doctor's office. I think it's a gauge for a humidifier. See the German link below: http://englisch.germanien.name/df7.ht
Explanation: As Terry indicates...
...there is no 'flutometer' that I've ever encountered in medicine (although that doesn't mean one doesn't exist). However - I have not been able to find, through my medical dictionaries, the web, or via my medical colleagues, anything resembling a flutometer (with "t").
Fluorometer , on the other hand, is a well-known, well used medical research and clinical instrument. Could this be another case of a typo?
Fluorographic imaging and fluorometric measurement have reached widespread use in clinical diagnosis and life science research. In comparison to other techniques, fluorometry and fluorography provide a number of advantages, such as greater convenience, lower cost, and lower occupational hazard. For a variety of applications, however, the sensitivity of traditional fluorescent technology falls substantially short to that of competitive techniques. Typical examples are DNA probes labeled with fluorescein or rhodamine, whose sensitivity compares poorly to that of probes labeled with P-32; and the use of fluorometry in immunoassay which does not approach the sensitivity of ELISA. Fluorescence Polarization Immunoassay (FPIA) can be used as an example to illustrate this point.