139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11585291)
1. Influence of OSEM and segmented attenuation correction in the calculation of standardised uptake values for [18F]FDG PET.
Visvikis D; Cheze-LeRest C; Costa DC; Bomanji J; Gacinovic S; Ell PJ
Eur J Nucl Med; 2001 Sep; 28(9):1326-35. PubMed ID: 11585291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. FDG-PET standardized uptake values in normal anatomical structures using iterative reconstruction segmented attenuation correction and filtered back-projection.
Ramos CD; Erdi YE; Gonen M; Riedel E; Yeung HW; Macapinlac HA; Chisin R; Larson SM
Eur J Nucl Med; 2001 Feb; 28(2):155-64. PubMed ID: 11303885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Experimental and clinical evaluation of iterative reconstruction (OSEM) in dynamic PET: quantitative characteristics and effects on kinetic modeling.
Boellaard R; van Lingen A; Lammertsma AA
J Nucl Med; 2001 May; 42(5):808-17. PubMed ID: 11337581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. CT-based attenuation correction in the calculation of semi-quantitative indices of [18F]FDG uptake in PET.
Visvikis D; Costa DC; Croasdale I; Lonn AH; Bomanji J; Gacinovic S; Ell PJ
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2003 Mar; 30(3):344-53. PubMed ID: 12634961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Attenuation correction in whole-body FDG oncological studies: the role of statistical reconstruction.
Lonneux M; Borbath I; Bol A; Coppens A; Sibomana M; Bausart R; Defrise M; Pauwels S; Michel C
Eur J Nucl Med; 1999 Jun; 26(6):591-8. PubMed ID: 10369944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Factors affecting standardized uptake value (SUV) of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with l8F-FDG.
Wiyaporn K; Tocharoenchai C; Pusuwan P; Ekjeen T; Leaungwutiwong S; Thanyarak S
J Med Assoc Thai; 2010 Jan; 93(1):108-14. PubMed ID: 20196419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Postinjection transmission scanning in myocardial 18F-FDG PET studies using both filtered backprojection and iterative reconstruction.
van der Weerdt AP; Boellaard R; Knaapen P; Visser CA; Lammertsma AA; Visser FC
J Nucl Med; 2004 Feb; 45(2):169-75. PubMed ID: 14960632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effects of iterative reconstruction on image contrast and lesion detection in gamma camera coincidence imaging in lung and breast cancers.
Paul AK; Tatsumi M; Yutani K; Fujino K; Hashikawa K; Nishimura T
Nucl Med Commun; 2002 Jan; 23(1):103-10. PubMed ID: 11748445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Noise reduction in oncology FDG PET images by iterative reconstruction: a quantitative assessment.
Riddell C; Carson RE; Carrasquillo JA; Libutti SK; Danforth DN; Whatley M; Bacharach SL
J Nucl Med; 2001 Sep; 42(9):1316-23. PubMed ID: 11535719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical respiratory motion correction software (reconstruct, register and averaged-RRA), for
Bouyeure-Petit AC; Chastan M; Edet-Sanson A; Becker S; Thureau S; Houivet E; Vera P; Hapdey S
Br J Radiol; 2017 Feb; 90(1070):20160549. PubMed ID: 27936893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical implications of different image reconstruction parameters for interpretation of whole-body PET studies in cancer patients.
Schöder H; Erdi YE; Chao K; Gonen M; Larson SM; Yeung HW
J Nucl Med; 2004 Apr; 45(4):559-66. PubMed ID: 15073250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quantification of FDG PET studies using standardised uptake values in multi-centre trials: effects of image reconstruction, resolution and ROI definition parameters.
Westerterp M; Pruim J; Oyen W; Hoekstra O; Paans A; Visser E; van Lanschot J; Sloof G; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2007 Mar; 34(3):392-404. PubMed ID: 17033848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13.
Lasnon C; Majdoub M; Lavigne B; Do P; Madelaine J; Visvikis D; Hatt M; Aide N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2016 Dec; 43(13):2324-2335. PubMed ID: 27325312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of iterative reconstruction (OSEM) versus filtered back-projection for the assessment of myocardial glucose uptake and myocardial perfusion using dynamic PET.
Søndergaard HM; Madsen MM; Boisen K; Bøttcher M; Schmitz O; Nielsen TT; Bøtker HE; Hansen SB
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2007 Mar; 34(3):320-9. PubMed ID: 17033850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Quantitative comparison of analytic and iterative reconstruction methods in 2- and 3-dimensional dynamic cardiac 18F-FDG PET.
Lubberink M; Boellaard R; van der Weerdt AP; Visser FC; Lammertsma AA
J Nucl Med; 2004 Dec; 45(12):2008-15. PubMed ID: 15585474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of different SUV-based methods for monitoring cytotoxic therapy with FDG PET.
Stahl A; Ott K; Schwaiger M; Weber WA
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2004 Nov; 31(11):1471-8. PubMed ID: 15257418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Fundamental evaluation of segmented attenuation correction method for clinical FDG-PET studies: simulation of pulmonary mass lesions in phantom studies].
Matsumoto K; Mori H
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2002 Dec; 58(12):1579-85. PubMed ID: 12577016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Analysis of FDG uptake with hybrid PET using standardised uptake values.
Zimny M; Kaiser HJ; Wildberger J; Nowak B; Cremerius U; Sabri O; Buell U
Eur J Nucl Med; 2001 May; 28(5):586-92. PubMed ID: 11383863
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation and Optimization of a New PET Reconstruction Algorithm, Bayesian Penalized Likelihood Reconstruction, for Lung Cancer Assessment According to Lesion Size.
Otani T; Hosono M; Kanagaki M; Onishi Y; Matsubara N; Kawabata K; Kimura H
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2019 Aug; 213(2):W50-W56. PubMed ID: 30995096
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Qualitative and quantitative comparison between images obtained with filtered back projection and iterative reconstruction in prostate cancer lesions of (18)F-FDG PET.
Etchebehere EC; Macapinlac HA; Gonen M; Humm K; Yeung HW; Akhurst T; Scher HI; Larson SM
Q J Nucl Med; 2002 Jun; 46(2):122-30. PubMed ID: 12114875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
