308 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18187896)
1. [Quantitative evaluation of block-iterative reconstruction image in PET: comparison of the dynamic RAMLA algorithm and OSEM algorithm].
Matsumoto K; Kitamura K; Shimizu K; Murase K
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2007 Oct; 63(10):1138-44. PubMed ID: 18187896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A practical way to improve contrast-to-noise ratio and quantitation for statistical-based iterative reconstruction in whole-body PET imaging.
Fin L; Bailly P; Daouk J; Meyer ME
Med Phys; 2009 Jul; 36(7):3072-9. PubMed ID: 19673206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Relaxed ordered subset preconditioned alternating projection algorithm for PET reconstruction with automated penalty weight selection.
Ross Schmidtlein C; Lin Y; Li S; Krol A; Beattie BJ; Humm JL; Xu Y
Med Phys; 2017 Aug; 44(8):4083-4097. PubMed ID: 28437565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Optimal relaxation parameters of DRAMA (dynamic RAMLA) aiming at one-pass image reconstruction for 3D-PET.
Tanaka E; Kudo H
Phys Med Biol; 2010 May; 55(10):2917-39. PubMed ID: 20436235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quantitative accuracy of MAP reconstruction for dynamic PET imaging in small animals.
Cheng JC; Shoghi K; Laforest R
Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):1029-41. PubMed ID: 22320813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The SRT reconstruction algorithm for semiquantification in PET imaging.
Kastis GA; Gaitanis A; Samartzis AP; Fokas AS
Med Phys; 2015 Oct; 42(10):5970-82. PubMed ID: 26429272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of dynamic row-action maximum likelihood algorithm reconstruction for quantitative 15O brain PET.
Ibaraki M; Sato K; Mizuta T; Kitamura K; Miura S; Sugawara S; Shinohara Y; Kinoshita T
Ann Nucl Med; 2009 Sep; 23(7):627-38. PubMed ID: 19562437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Subset-dependent relaxation in block-iterative algorithms for image reconstruction in emission tomography.
Tanaka E; Kudo H
Phys Med Biol; 2003 May; 48(10):1405-22. PubMed ID: 12812455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Quantitative and Qualitative Improvement of Low-Count [
Seo Y; Khalighi MM; Wangerin KA; Deller TW; Wang YH; Jivan S; Kohi MP; Aggarwal R; Flavell RR; Behr SC; Evans MJ
Mol Imaging Biol; 2020 Feb; 22(1):208-216. PubMed ID: 30993558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Optimization of PET/CT image quality using the GE 'Sharp IR' point-spread function reconstruction algorithm.
Vennart NJ; Bird N; Buscombe J; Cheow HK; Nowosinska E; Heard S
Nucl Med Commun; 2017 Jun; 38(6):471-479. PubMed ID: 28394818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reliability of predicting image signal-to-noise ratio using noise equivalent count rate in PET imaging.
Chang T; Chang G; Clark JW; Diab RH; Rohren E; Mawlawi OR
Med Phys; 2012 Oct; 39(10):5891-900. PubMed ID: 23039628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. PET based volume segmentation with emphasis on the iterative TrueX algorithm.
Knäusl B; Hirtl A; Dobrozemsky G; Bergmann H; Kletter K; Dudczak R; Georg D
Z Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 22(1):29-39. PubMed ID: 21251804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The edge artifact in the point-spread function-based PET reconstruction at different sphere-to-background ratios of radioactivity.
Kidera D; Kihara K; Akamatsu G; Mikasa S; Taniguchi T; Tsutsui Y; Takeshita T; Maebatake A; Miwa K; Sasaki M
Ann Nucl Med; 2016 Feb; 30(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 26531181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Optimizing scan time and bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm in copper-64 PET/CT imaging: a phantom study.
Monsef A; Sheikhzadeh P; Steiner JR; Sadeghi F; Yazdani M; Ghafarian P
Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2024 May; 10(4):. PubMed ID: 38608316
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. (90)Y -PET imaging: Exploring limitations and accuracy under conditions of low counts and high random fraction.
Carlier T; Willowson KP; Fourkal E; Bailey DL; Doss M; Conti M
Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):4295-309. PubMed ID: 26133627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Incorporating HYPR de-noising within iterative PET reconstruction (HYPR-OSEM).
Cheng JK; Matthews J; Sossi V; Anton-Rodriguez J; Salomon A; Boellaard R
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Aug; 62(16):6666-6687. PubMed ID: 28644152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimization of
Alqahtani MM; Willowson KP; Constable C; Fulton R; Kench PL
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2022 Apr; 23(4):e13528. PubMed ID: 35049129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The impact of reconstruction algorithms and time of flight information on PET/CT image quality.
Suljic A; Tomse P; Jensterle L; Skrk D
Radiol Oncol; 2015 Sep; 49(3):227-33. PubMed ID: 26401127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of varying number of OSEM subsets on PET lesion detectability.
Morey AM; Kadrmas DJ
J Nucl Med Technol; 2013 Dec; 41(4):268-73. PubMed ID: 24221921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
