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.
177 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. Investigation of time-of-flight benefit for fully 3-D PET. Surti S; Karp JS; Popescu LM; Daube-Witherspoon ME; Werner M IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2006 May; 25(5):529-38. PubMed ID: 16689258 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]