81 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22596020)
1. The Akaike information criterion in DCE-MRI: does it improve the haemodynamic parameter estimates?
Luypaert R; Ingrisch M; Sourbron S; de Mey J
Phys Med Biol; 2012 Jun; 57(11):3609-28. PubMed ID: 22596020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Tracer kinetic model selection for dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of locally advanced cervical cancer.
Kallehauge JF; Tanderup K; Duan C; Haack S; Pedersen EM; Lindegaard JC; Fokdal LU; Mohamed SM; Nielsen T
Acta Oncol; 2014 Aug; 53(8):1064-72. PubMed ID: 25034348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Error estimation for perfusion parameters obtained using the two-compartment exchange model in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a simulation study.
Luypaert R; Sourbron S; Makkat S; de Mey J
Phys Med Biol; 2010 Nov; 55(21):6431-43. PubMed ID: 20952813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison between PUN and Tofts models in the quantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.
Mazzetti S; Gliozzi AS; Bracco C; Russo F; Regge D; Stasi M
Phys Med Biol; 2012 Dec; 57(24):8443-53. PubMed ID: 23202297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimizing functional parameter accuracy for breath-hold DCE-MRI of liver tumours.
Orton MR; Miyazaki K; Koh DM; Collins DJ; Hawkes DJ; Atkinson D; Leach MO
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Apr; 54(7):2197-215. PubMed ID: 19293470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Improved correlation to quantitative DCE-MRI pharmacokinetic parameters using a modified initial area under the uptake curve (mIAUC) approach.
Cheng HL
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2009 Oct; 30(4):864-72. PubMed ID: 19787732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Estimating kinetic parameter maps from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using spatial prior knowledge.
Kelm BM; Menze BH; Nix O; Zechmann CM; Hamprecht FA
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2009 Oct; 28(10):1534-47. PubMed ID: 19369150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Computationally efficient vascular input function models for quantitative kinetic modelling using DCE-MRI.
Orton MR; d'Arcy JA; Walker-Samuel S; Hawkes DJ; Atkinson D; Collins DJ; Leach MO
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Mar; 53(5):1225-39. PubMed ID: 18296759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Intraindividual in vivo comparison of gadolinium contrast agents for pharmacokinetic analysis using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
Liang J; Sammet S; Yang X; Jia G; Takayama Y; Knopp MV
Invest Radiol; 2010 May; 45(5):233-44. PubMed ID: 20351653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The use of a reference tissue arterial input function with low-temporal-resolution DCE-MRI data.
Heisen M; Fan X; Buurman J; van Riel NA; Karczmar GS; ter Haar Romeny BM
Phys Med Biol; 2010 Aug; 55(16):4871-83. PubMed ID: 20679692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Validity of perfusion parameters obtained using the modified Tofts model: a simulation study.
Luypaert R; Sourbron S; de Mey J
Magn Reson Med; 2011 May; 65(5):1491-7. PubMed ID: 21500273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An analysis of the pharmacokinetic parameter ratios in DCE-MRI using the reference region model.
Lee J; Platt S; Kent M; Zhao Q
Magn Reson Imaging; 2012 Jan; 30(1):26-35. PubMed ID: 22071409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Determination of pharmacokinetic parameters in DCE MRI: Consequence of nonlinearity between contrast agent concentration and signal intensity.
Heilmann M; Kiessling F; Enderlin M; Schad LR
Invest Radiol; 2006 Jun; 41(6):536-43. PubMed ID: 16763473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Resampling methods for model fitting and model selection.
Babu GJ
J Biopharm Stat; 2011 Nov; 21(6):1177-86. PubMed ID: 22023685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of tumor histology to dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging-based physiological estimates.
Aref M; Chaudhari AR; Bailey KL; Aref S; Wiener EC
Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Nov; 26(9):1279-93. PubMed ID: 18487033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The effect of motion correction on pharmacokinetic parameter estimation in dynamic-contrast-enhanced MRI.
Melbourne A; Hipwell J; Modat M; Mertzanidou T; Huisman H; Ourselin S; Hawkes DJ
Phys Med Biol; 2011 Dec; 56(24):7693-708. PubMed ID: 22086390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Investigation and optimization of parameter accuracy in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.
Cheng HL
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Sep; 28(3):736-43. PubMed ID: 18777534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Bayesian estimation of pharmacokinetic parameters for DCE-MRI with a robust treatment of enhancement onset time.
Orton MR; Collins DJ; Walker-Samuel S; d'Arcy JA; Hawkes DJ; Atkinson D; Leach MO
Phys Med Biol; 2007 May; 52(9):2393-408. PubMed ID: 17440242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Analysis of prostate DCE-MRI: comparison of fast exchange limit and fast exchange regimen pharmacokinetic models in the discrimination of malignant from normal tissue.
Lowry M; Zelhof B; Liney GP; Gibbs P; Pickles MD; Turnbull LW
Invest Radiol; 2009 Sep; 44(9):577-84. PubMed ID: 19668002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Impact of fitting algorithms on errors of parameter estimates in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.
Debus C; Floca R; Nörenberg D; Abdollahi A; Ingrisch M
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Nov; 62(24):9322-9340. PubMed ID: 28858856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
