115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12210944)
1. Perfusion quantification using Gaussian process deconvolution.
Andersen IK; Szymkowiak A; Rasmussen CE; Hanson LG; Marstrand JR; Larsson HB; Hansen LK
Magn Reson Med; 2002 Aug; 48(2):351-61. PubMed ID: 12210944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Advantages of frequency-domain modeling in dynamic-susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance cerebral blood flow quantification.
Chen JJ; Smith MR; Frayne R
Magn Reson Med; 2005 Mar; 53(3):700-7. PubMed ID: 15723395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A control point interpolation method for the non-parametric quantification of cerebral haemodynamics from dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI.
Mehndiratta A; MacIntosh BJ; Crane DE; Payne SJ; Chappell MA
Neuroimage; 2013 Jan; 64():560-70. PubMed ID: 22975158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Removing the effect of SVD algorithmic artifacts present in quantitative MR perfusion studies.
Smith MR; Lu H; Trochet S; Frayne R
Magn Reson Med; 2004 Mar; 51(3):631-4. PubMed ID: 15004809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quantification of bolus-tracking MRI: Improved characterization of the tissue residue function using Tikhonov regularization.
Calamante F; Gadian DG; Connelly A
Magn Reson Med; 2003 Dec; 50(6):1237-47. PubMed ID: 14648572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Signal-to-noise ratio effects in quantitative cerebral perfusion using dynamic susceptibility contrast agents.
Smith MR; Lu H; Frayne R
Magn Reson Med; 2003 Jan; 49(1):122-8. PubMed ID: 12509827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Aspects on the accuracy of cerebral perfusion parameters obtained by dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI: a simulation study.
Knutsson L; Ståhlberg F; Wirestam R
Magn Reson Imaging; 2004 Jul; 22(6):789-98. PubMed ID: 15234447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cerebral blood flow estimation from perfusion-weighted MRI using FT-based MMSE filtering method.
Sakoglu U; Sood R
Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Apr; 26(3):313-22. PubMed ID: 18158225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of clinical data of nonlinear stochastic deconvolution versus block-circulant singular value decomposition for quantitative dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging.
Peruzzo D; Zanderigo F; Bertoldo A; Pillonetto G; Cosottini M; Cobelli C
Magn Reson Imaging; 2011 Sep; 29(7):927-36. PubMed ID: 21616625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Three-dimensional dynamic susceptibility-weighted perfusion MR imaging at 3.0 T: feasibility and contrast agent dose.
Manka C; Träber F; Gieseke J; Schild HH; Kuhl CK
Radiology; 2005 Mar; 234(3):869-77. PubMed ID: 15665227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Perfusion quantification by model-free arterial spin labeling using nonlinear stochastic regularization deconvolution.
Ahlgren A; Wirestam R; Petersen ET; Ståhlberg F; Knutsson L
Magn Reson Med; 2013 Nov; 70(5):1470-80. PubMed ID: 23281031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. DSC perfusion MRI-Quantification and reduction of systematic errors arising in areas of reduced cerebral blood flow.
Carpenter TK; Armitage PA; Bastin ME; Wardlaw JM
Magn Reson Med; 2006 Jun; 55(6):1342-9. PubMed ID: 16683256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Tracer delay correction of cerebral blood flow with dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI.
Ibaraki M; Shimosegawa E; Toyoshima H; Takahashi K; Miura S; Kanno I
J Cereb Blood Flow Metab; 2005 Mar; 25(3):378-90. PubMed ID: 15674238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Deconvolution analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced data based on singular value decomposition optimized by generalized cross validation.
Murase K; Yamazaki Y; Miyazaki S
Magn Reson Med Sci; 2004; 3(4):165-75. PubMed ID: 16093635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An alternative viewpoint of the similarities and differences of SVD and FT deconvolution algorithms used for quantitative MR perfusion studies.
Salluzzi M; Frayne R; Smith MR
Magn Reson Imaging; 2005 Apr; 23(3):481-92. PubMed ID: 15862650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Robust dynamic susceptibility contrast MR perfusion using 4D nonlinear noise filters.
Kosior JC; Kosior RK; Frayne R
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2007 Dec; 26(6):1514-22. PubMed ID: 17968968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. pASL versus DSC perfusion MRI in lateralizing temporal lobe epilepsy.
Oner AY; Eryurt B; Ucar M; Capraz I; Kurt G; Bilir E; Tali T
Acta Radiol; 2015 Apr; 56(4):477-81. PubMed ID: 24782571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A microfabricated phantom for quantitative MR perfusion measurements: validation of singular value decomposition deconvolution method.
Ebrahimi B; Swanson SD; Chupp TE
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2010 Nov; 57(11):. PubMed ID: 20601306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of contrast agents with high molarity and with weak protein binding in cerebral perfusion imaging at 3 T.
Thilmann O; Larsson EM; Björkman-Burtscher IM; Ståhlberg F; Wirestam R
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2005 Nov; 22(5):597-604. PubMed ID: 16200539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assesment of perfusion in glial tumors with arterial spin labeling; comparison with dynamic susceptibility contrast method.
Cebeci H; Aydin O; Ozturk-Isik E; Gumus C; Inecikli F; Bekar A; Kocaeli H; Hakyemez B
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Oct; 83(10):1914-9. PubMed ID: 25087109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
