116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20176733)
1. A phantom for investigation of tumour signal and noise in PET reconstruction with various smoothing filters: experiments and comparisons with simulated intensity diffusion.
Skretting A; Glomset O; Bogsrud TV
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010; 139(1-3):191-4. PubMed ID: 20176733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Usefulness of noise adaptive non-linear gaussian filter in FDG-PET study.
Nagayoshi M; Murase K; Fujino K; Uenishi Y; Kawamata M; Nakamura Y; Kitamura K; Higuchi I; Oku N; Hatazawa J
Ann Nucl Med; 2005 Sep; 19(6):469-77. PubMed ID: 16248383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A modified OSEM algorithm for PET reconstruction using wavelet processing.
Lee NY; Choi Y
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2005 Dec; 80(3):236-45. PubMed ID: 16274838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Noise and signal decoupling in maximum-likelihood reconstructions and Metz filters for PET brain images.
Liow JS; Strother SC
Phys Med Biol; 1994 Apr; 39(4):735-50. PubMed ID: 15552081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A method for on-site measurements of the effective spatial resolution in PET image volumes reconstructed with OSEM and Gaussian post-filters.
Skretting A
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010; 139(1-3):195-8. PubMed ID: 20164108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Compressed sensing for reduction of noise and artefacts in direct PET image reconstruction.
Richter D; Basse-Lüsebrink TC; Kampf T; Fischer A; Israel I; Schneider M; Jakob PM; Samnick S
Z Med Phys; 2014 Mar; 24(1):16-26. PubMed ID: 23756331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Towards tracer dose reduction in PET studies: Simulation of dose reduction by retrospective randomized undersampling of list-mode data.
Gatidis S; Würslin C; Seith F; Schäfer JF; la Fougère C; Nikolaou K; Schwenzer NF; Schmidt H
Hell J Nucl Med; 2016; 19(1):15-8. PubMed ID: 26929936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. SUV correction for injection errors in FDG-PET examination.
Miyashita K; Takahashi N; Oka T; Asakawa S; Lee J; Shizukuishi K; Inoue T
Ann Nucl Med; 2007 Dec; 21(10):607-13. PubMed ID: 18092139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Improvement of the diagnostic accuracy of lymph node metastases of colorectal cancer in 18F-FDG-PET/CT by optimizing the iteration number for the image reconstruction.
Inoue K; Sato T; Kitamura H; Ito M; Tsunoda Y; Hirayama A; Kurosawa H; Tanaka T; Fukushi M; Moriyama N; Fujii H
Ann Nucl Med; 2008 Jul; 22(6):465-73. PubMed ID: 18670852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Impact of [¹⁸F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: need for improved tumour delineation methodology.
Cheebsumon P; Yaqub M; van Velden FH; Hoekstra OS; Lammertsma AA; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2011 Dec; 38(12):2136-44. PubMed ID: 21858528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. FDG-PET parametric imaging by total variation minimization.
Guo H; Renaut RA; Chen K; Reiman E
Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2009 Jun; 33(4):295-303. PubMed ID: 19261438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An algorithm for PET tumor volume and activity quantification: without specifying camera's point spread function (PSF).
Bhatt R; Adjouadi M; Goryawala M; Gulec SA; McGoron AJ
Med Phys; 2012 Jul; 39(7):4187-202. PubMed ID: 22830752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. LOR-OSEM: statistical PET reconstruction from raw line-of-response histograms.
Kadrmas DJ
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Oct; 49(20):4731-44. PubMed ID: 15566171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Influence of PET reconstruction parameters on the TrueX algorithm. A combined phantom and patient study.
Knäusl B; Rausch IF; Bergmann H; Dudczak R; Hirtl A; Georg D
Nuklearmedizin; 2013; 52(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 23348719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Impact of image-space resolution modeling for studies with the high-resolution research tomograph.
Sureau FC; Reader AJ; Comtat C; Leroy C; Ribeiro MJ; Buvat I; Trébossen R
J Nucl Med; 2008 Jun; 49(6):1000-8. PubMed ID: 18511844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Assessment of tumour response with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography using three-dimensional measures compared to SUVmax--a phantom study.
Boucek JA; Francis RJ; Jones CG; Khan N; Turlach BA; Green AJ
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Aug; 53(16):4213-30. PubMed ID: 18653927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Using EQ·PET to reduce reconstruction-dependent variations in [
Vanhoutte M; Semah F; Lopes R; Jaillard A; Petyt G; Aziz AL; Lahousse H; Declerck J; Pasquier F; Spottiswoode B; Fahmi R
Phys Med Biol; 2019 Aug; 64(17):175002. PubMed ID: 31344691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
