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.
3. Optimization of PET reconstruction algorithm, SUV thresholding algorithm and PET acquisition time in clinical 11C-acetate PET/CT. Strandberg S; Hashemi A; Axelsson J; Riklund K PLoS One; 2018; 13(12):e0209169. PubMed ID: 30543705 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Instrumentation factors affecting variance and bias of quantifying tracer uptake with PET/CT. Doot RK; Scheuermann JS; Christian PE; Karp JS; Kinahan PE Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):6035-46. PubMed ID: 21158315 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Repeatability of SUV measurements in serial PET. Schwartz J; Humm JL; Gonen M; Kalaigian H; Schoder H; Larson SM; Nehmeh SA Med Phys; 2011 May; 38(5):2629-38. PubMed ID: 21776800 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Simulated Reduced-Count Whole-Body FDG PET: Evaluation in Children and Young Adults Imaged on a Digital PET Scanner. Alves VPV; Brady S; Ata NA; Li Y; MacLean J; Zhang B; Sharp SE; Trout AT AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 Dec; 219(6):952-961. PubMed ID: 35731102 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Evaluation of Penalized-Likelihood Estimation Reconstruction on a Digital Time-of-Flight PET/CT Scanner for Lindström E; Sundin A; Trampal C; Lindsjö L; Ilan E; Danfors T; Antoni G; Sörensen J; Lubberink M J Nucl Med; 2018 Jul; 59(7):1152-1158. PubMed ID: 29449445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of prone versus supine 18F-FDG-PET of locally advanced breast cancer: Phantom and preliminary clinical studies. Williams JM; Rani SD; Li X; Arlinghaus LR; Lee TC; MacDonald LR; Partridge SC; Kang H; Whisenant JG; Abramson RG; Linden HM; Kinahan PE; Yankeelov TE Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3801-13. PubMed ID: 26133582 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Performance of a deep learning enhancement method applied to PET images acquired with a reduced acquisition time. Ciborowski K; Gramek-Jedwabna A; Gołąb M; Miechowicz I; Szczurek J; Ruchała M; Czepczyński R Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur; 2023; 26(0):116-122. PubMed ID: 37786943 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantification accuracy of neuro-oncology PET data as a function of emission scan duration in PET/MR compared to PET/CT. Wampl S; Rausch I; Traub-Weidinger T; Beyer T; Gröschl M; Cal-González J Eur J Radiol; 2017 Oct; 95():257-264. PubMed ID: 28987677 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quantitative and Visual Assessments toward Potential Sub-mSv or Ultrafast FDG PET Using High-Sensitivity TOF PET in PET/MRI. Behr SC; Bahroos E; Hawkins RA; Nardo L; Ravanfar V; Capbarat EV; Seo Y Mol Imaging Biol; 2018 Jun; 20(3):492-500. PubMed ID: 29192363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Feasibility of equivalent performance of 3D TOF [ Pilz J; Hehenwarter L; Zimmermann G; Rendl G; Schweighofer-Zwink G; Beheshti M; Pirich C EJNMMI Res; 2021 May; 11(1):44. PubMed ID: 33934218 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Quantitative accuracy of PET/CT for image-based kinetic analysis. Seo Y; Teo BK; Hadi M; Schreck C; Bacharach SL; Hasegawa BH Med Phys; 2008 Jul; 35(7):3086-9. PubMed ID: 18697532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. CT-based attenuation correction in the calculation of semi-quantitative indices of [18F]FDG uptake in PET. Visvikis D; Costa DC; Croasdale I; Lonn AH; Bomanji J; Gacinovic S; Ell PJ Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2003 Mar; 30(3):344-53. PubMed ID: 12634961 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of different SUV-based methods for monitoring cytotoxic therapy with FDG PET. Stahl A; Ott K; Schwaiger M; Weber WA Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2004 Nov; 31(11):1471-8. PubMed ID: 15257418 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]