These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
542 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15073270)
1. A lesion detection observer study comparing 2-dimensional versus fully 3-dimensional whole-body PET imaging protocols. Lartizien C; Kinahan PE; Comtat C J Nucl Med; 2004 Apr; 45(4):714-23. PubMed ID: 15073270 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluating image reconstruction methods for tumor detection in 3-dimensional whole-body PET oncology imaging. Lartizien C; Kinahan PE; Swensson R; Comtat C; Lin M; Villemagne V; Trébossen R J Nucl Med; 2003 Feb; 44(2):276-90. PubMed ID: 12571221 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional acquisition for 18F-FDG PET oncology studies performed on an LSO-based scanner. Lodge MA; Badawi RD; Gilbert R; Dibos PE; Line BR J Nucl Med; 2006 Jan; 47(1):23-31. PubMed ID: 16391183 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Impact of acquisition geometry, image processing, and patient size on lesion detection in whole-body 18F-FDG PET. El Fakhri G; Santos PA; Badawi RD; Holdsworth CH; Van Den Abbeele AD; Kijewski MF J Nucl Med; 2007 Dec; 48(12):1951-60. PubMed ID: 18006613 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimization of injected dose based on noise equivalent count rates for 2- and 3-dimensional whole-body PET. Lartizien C; Comtat C; Kinahan PE; Ferreira N; Bendriem B; Trébossen R J Nucl Med; 2002 Sep; 43(9):1268-78. PubMed ID: 12215569 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 4D numerical observer for lesion detection in respiratory-gated PET. Lorsakul A; Li Q; Trott CM; Hoog C; Petibon Y; Ouyang J; Laine AF; El Fakhri G Med Phys; 2014 Oct; 41(10):102504. PubMed ID: 25281979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Optimal dose of 18F-FDG required for whole-body PET using an LSO PET camera. Everaert H; Vanhove C; Lahoutte T; Muylle K; Caveliers V; Bossuyt A; Franken PR Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2003 Dec; 30(12):1615-9. PubMed ID: 14504831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical evaluation of 2D versus 3D whole-body PET image quality using a dedicated BGO PET scanner. Visvikis D; Griffiths D; Costa DC; Bomanji J; Ell PJ Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2005 Sep; 32(9):1050-6. PubMed ID: 15846487 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional 82Rb myocardial perfusion PET imaging. Knesaurek K; Machac J; Krynyckyi BR; Almeida OD J Nucl Med; 2003 Aug; 44(8):1350-6. PubMed ID: 12902427 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Optimization of the injected activity in dynamic 3D PET: a generalized approach using patient-specific NECs as demonstrated by a series of 15O-H2O scans. Walker MD; Matthews JC; Asselin MC; Saleem A; Dickinson C; Charnley N; Julyan PJ; Price PM; Jones T J Nucl Med; 2009 Sep; 50(9):1409-17. PubMed ID: 19690021 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Correction methods for random coincidences in fully 3D whole-body PET: impact on data and image quality. Brasse D; Kinahan PE; Lartizien C; Comtat C; Casey M; Michel C J Nucl Med; 2005 May; 46(5):859-67. PubMed ID: 15872361 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical evaluation of PET image reconstruction using a spatial resolution model. Andersen FL; Klausen TL; Loft A; Beyer T; Holm S Eur J Radiol; 2013 May; 82(5):862-9. PubMed ID: 23254158 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Volumetric model and human observer comparisons of tumor detection for whole-body positron emission tomography. Lartizien C; Kinahan PE; Comtat C Acad Radiol; 2004 Jun; 11(6):637-48. PubMed ID: 15172366 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Imaging characteristics of a 3-dimensional GSO whole-body PET camera. Surti S; Karp JS J Nucl Med; 2004 Jun; 45(6):1040-9. PubMed ID: 15181139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Experimental comparison of lesion detectability for four fully-3D PET reconstruction schemes. Kadrmas DJ; Casey ME; Black NF; Hamill JJ; Panin VY; Conti M IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2009 Apr; 28(4):523-34. PubMed ID: 19272998 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Reduction of radiation exposure in PET examinations by data acquisition in the 3D mode]. Brix G; Adam LE; Zaers J; Trojan H; Bellemann ME; Nosske D; Doll J Nuklearmedizin; 1999 Apr; 38(3):75-9. PubMed ID: 10320992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Automated 3-dimensional registration of stand-alone (18)F-FDG whole-body PET with CT. Slomka PJ; Dey D; Przetak C; Aladl UE; Baum RP J Nucl Med; 2003 Jul; 44(7):1156-67. PubMed ID: 12843232 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Impact of patient weight and emission scan duration on PET/CT image quality and lesion detectability. Halpern BS; Dahlbom M; Quon A; Schiepers C; Waldherr C; Silverman DH; Ratib O; Czernin J J Nucl Med; 2004 May; 45(5):797-801. PubMed ID: 15136629 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]