182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23685783)
1. Study of PET scanner designs using clinical metrics to optimize the scanner axial FOV and crystal thickness.
Surti S; Werner ME; Karp JS
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Jun; 58(12):3995-4012. PubMed ID: 23685783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of detector design on imaging performance of a long axial field-of-view, whole-body PET scanner.
Surti S; Karp JS
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Jul; 60(13):5343-58. PubMed ID: 26108352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of cost-effective system designs for long axial field-of-view PET scanners.
Surti S; Werner ME; Karp JS
Phys Med Biol; 2023 May; 68(10):. PubMed ID: 37084744
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Physical performance of a long axial field-of-view PET scanner prototype with sparse rings configuration: A Monte Carlo simulation study.
Zein SA; Karakatsanis NA; Issa M; Haj-Ali AA; Nehmeh SA
Med Phys; 2020 Apr; 47(4):1949-1957. PubMed ID: 31985827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Monte Carlo evaluation of hypothetical long axial field-of-view PET scanner using GE Discovery MI PET front-end architecture.
Tiwari A; Merrick M; Graves SA; Sunderland J
Med Phys; 2022 Feb; 49(2):1139-1152. PubMed ID: 34954831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Theoretical study of the benefit of long axial field-of-view PET on region of interest quantification.
Zhang X; Badawi RD; Cherry SR; Qi J
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Jun; 63(13):135010. PubMed ID: 29799814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effective count rates for PET scanners with reduced and extended axial field of view.
MacDonald LR; Harrison RL; Alessio AM; Hunter WC; Lewellen TK; Kinahan PE
Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jun; 56(12):3629-43. PubMed ID: 21610291
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Optimal whole-body PET scanner configurations for different volumes of LSO scintillator: a simulation study.
Poon JK; Dahlbom ML; Moses WW; Balakrishnan K; Wang W; Cherry SR; Badawi RD
Phys Med Biol; 2012 Jul; 57(13):4077-94. PubMed ID: 22678106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities.
Surti S; Kuhn A; Werner ME; Perkins AE; Kolthammer J; Karp JS
J Nucl Med; 2007 Mar; 48(3):471-80. PubMed ID: 17332626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Image quality assessment of LaBr3-based whole-body 3D PET scanners: a Monte Carlo evaluation.
Surti S; Karp JS; Muehllehner G
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Oct; 49(19):4593-610. PubMed ID: 15552419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Physical performance of adaptive axial FOV PET scanners with a sparse detector block rings or a checkerboard configuration.
Karakatsanis NA; Nehmeh MH; Conti M; Bal G; González AJ; Nehmeh SA
Phys Med Biol; 2022 May; 67(10):. PubMed ID: 35472757
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Numerical observer study of lesion detectability for a long axial field-of-view whole-body PET imager using the PennPET Explorer.
Viswanath V; Daube Witherspoon ME; Karp JS; Surti S
Phys Med Biol; 2020 Jan; 65(3):035002. PubMed ID: 31816616
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Performance Evaluation of the uEXPLORER Total-Body PET/CT Scanner Based on NEMA NU 2-2018 with Additional Tests to Characterize PET Scanners with a Long Axial Field of View.
Spencer BA; Berg E; Schmall JP; Omidvari N; Leung EK; Abdelhafez YG; Tang S; Deng Z; Dong Y; Lv Y; Bao J; Liu W; Li H; Jones T; Badawi RD; Cherry SR
J Nucl Med; 2021 Jun; 62(6):861-870. PubMed ID: 33008932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of system geometry and other physical factors on photon sensitivity of high-resolution positron emission tomography.
Habte F; Foudray AM; Olcott PD; Levin CS
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jul; 52(13):3753-72. PubMed ID: 17664575
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Parallax error in long-axial field-of-view PET scanners-a simulation study.
Schmall JP; Karp JS; Werner M; Surti S
Phys Med Biol; 2016 Jul; 61(14):5443-5455. PubMed ID: 27367971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Experimental characterization and system simulations of depth of interaction PET detectors using 0.5 mm and 0.7 mm LSO arrays.
James SS; Yang Y; Wu Y; Farrell R; Dokhale P; Shah KS; Cherry SR
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Jul; 54(14):4605-19. PubMed ID: 19567945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Preliminary study on potential of the jPET-D4 human brain scanner for small animal imaging.
Yamaya T; Yoshida E; Toramatsu C; Nishimura M; Shimada Y; Inadama N; Shibuya K; Nishikido F; Murayama H
Ann Nucl Med; 2009 Feb; 23(2):183-90. PubMed ID: 19225942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A count-rate model for PET scanners using pixelated Anger-logic detectors with different scintillators.
Surti S; Karp JS
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Dec; 50(23):5697-715. PubMed ID: 16306662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Optimization and performance evaluation of the microPET II scanner for in vivo small-animal imaging.
Yang Y; Tai YC; Siegel S; Newport DF; Bai B; Li Q; Leahy RM; Cherry SR
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Jun; 49(12):2527-45. PubMed ID: 15272672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Monte Carlo simulation of the system performance of a long axial field-of-view PET based on monolithic LYSO detectors.
Abi-Akl M; Dadgar M; Toufique Y; Bouhali O; Vandenberghe S
EJNMMI Phys; 2023 Jun; 10(1):37. PubMed ID: 37311926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
