104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19306510)
1. Comparison of 2D and 3D performance for FDG PET with different acquisition times in oncological patients.
Komar G; Teräs M; Seppänen M; Hirvonen J; Vahlberg T; Bergman J; Minn H
Nucl Med Commun; 2009 Jan; 30(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 19306510
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Two-dimensional vs three-dimensional imaging in whole body oncologic PET/CT: a Discovery-STE phantom and patient study.
Bettinardi V; Mancosu P; Danna M; Giovacchini G; Landoni C; Picchio M; Gilardi MC; Savi A; Castiglioni I; Lecchi M; Fazio F
Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2007 Sep; 51(3):214-23. PubMed ID: 17464266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Comparison of standardized uptake values obtained from two- and three-dimensional modes of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT in oncological cases.
Kocabaş B; Yapar AF; Reyhan M; Aktaş A; Aydin M; Gençoğlu EA
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2013; 19(2):126-9. PubMed ID: 23266970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Evaluation of optimized injection dose and acquisition time using body mass index for three-dimensional whole-body FDG-PET].
Matsumoto K; Matsuura H; Minota E; Sakamoto S; Nakamoto Y; Senda M
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2004 Nov; 60(11):1564-73. PubMed ID: 15568009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Investigation of 18F-FDG 3D mode PET image quality versus acquisition time.
Brown C; Dempsey MF; Gillen G; Elliott AT
Nucl Med Commun; 2010 Mar; 31(3):254-9. PubMed ID: 20032801
[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. 18F-FDG PET for detecting myocardial viability: validation of 3D data acquisition.
Brogsitter C; Grüning T; Weise R; Wielepp P; Lindner O; Körfer R; Burchert W
J Nucl Med; 2005 Jan; 46(1):19-24. PubMed ID: 15632028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Correlation of simultaneously acquired diffusion-weighted imaging and 2-deoxy-[18F] fluoro-2-D-glucose positron emission tomography of pulmonary lesions in a dedicated whole-body magnetic resonance/positron emission tomography system.
Schmidt H; Brendle C; Schraml C; Martirosian P; Bezrukov I; Hetzel J; Müller M; Sauter A; Claussen CD; Pfannenberg C; Schwenzer NF
Invest Radiol; 2013 May; 48(5):247-55. PubMed ID: 23519008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Tumour detectability in 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional positron emission tomography using the SET-2400W: a phantom study.
Zhang H; Inoue T; Alyafei S; Tian M; Oriuchi N; Endo K
Nucl Med Commun; 2001 Mar; 22(3):305-14. PubMed ID: 11314763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Accuracy of 3D acquisition mode for myocardial FDG PET studies using a BGO-based scanner.
van der Weerdt AP; Boellaard R; Visser FC; Lammertsma AA
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2007 Sep; 34(9):1439-46. PubMed ID: 17333179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of image quality with 62Cu and 64Cu-labeled radiotracers in positron emission tomography whole-body phantom imaging.
Kobayashi M; Mori T; Tsujikawa T; Ogai K; Sugama J; Kiyono Y; Kawai K; Okazawa H
Hell J Nucl Med; 2015; 18(2):103-7. PubMed ID: 26187208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Optimization of PET image quality by means of 3D data acquisition and iterative image reconstruction].
Doll J; Zaers J; Trojan H; Bellemann ME; Adam LE; Haberkorn U; Brix G
Nuklearmedizin; 1998 Mar; 37(2):62-7. PubMed ID: 9547752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. More advantages in detecting bone and soft tissue metastases from prostate cancer using
Pianou NK; Stavrou PZ; Vlontzou E; Rondogianni P; Exarhos DN; Datseris IE
Hell J Nucl Med; 2019; 22(1):6-9. PubMed ID: 30843003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Quantitative studies using positron emission tomography (PET) for the diagnosis and therapy planning of oncological patients.
Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A; Strauss L
Hell J Nucl Med; 2006; 9(1):10-21. PubMed ID: 16617388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of a new motion correction algorithm in PET/CT: combining the entire acquired PET data to create a single three-dimensional motion-corrected PET/CT image.
Minamimoto R; Mitsumoto T; Miyata Y; Sunaoka F; Morooka M; Okasaki M; Iagaru A; Kubota K
Nucl Med Commun; 2016 Feb; 37(2):162-70. PubMed ID: 26513056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Optimizing positron emission tomography image acquisition protocols in integrated positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging.
Hartung-Knemeyer V; Beiderwellen KJ; Buchbender C; Kuehl H; Lauenstein TC; Bockisch A; Poeppel TD
Invest Radiol; 2013 May; 48(5):290-4. PubMed ID: 23399811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Fundamental study of hot spot detectability in 3-dimensional positron emission tomography.
Zhang H; Inoue T; Alyafei S; Tian M; Oriuchi N; Ichikawa A; Matsubara K; Endo K
Ann Nucl Med; 2000 Aug; 14(4):279-84. PubMed ID: 11023028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
