265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24312151)
1. Tumor quantification in clinical positron emission tomography.
Bai B; Bading J; Conti PS
Theranostics; 2013 Oct; 3(10):787-801. PubMed ID: 24312151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Optimizing positron emission tomography image acquisition protocols in integrated positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging.
Hartung-Knemeyer V; Beiderwellen KJ; Buchbender C; Kuehl H; Lauenstein TC; Bockisch A; Poeppel TD
Invest Radiol; 2013 May; 48(5):290-4. PubMed ID: 23399811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value.
Lodge MA; Chaudhry MA; Wahl RL
J Nucl Med; 2012 Jul; 53(7):1041-7. PubMed ID: 22627001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of a cumulative SUV-volume histogram method for parameterizing heterogeneous intratumoural FDG uptake in non-small cell lung cancer PET studies.
van Velden FH; Cheebsumon P; Yaqub M; Smit EF; Hoekstra OS; Lammertsma AA; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2011 Sep; 38(9):1636-47. PubMed ID: 21617975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Is the standard uptake value (SUV) appropriate for quantification in clinical PET imaging? - Variability induced by different SUV measurements and varying reconstruction methods.
Brendle C; Kupferschläger J; Nikolaou K; la Fougère C; Gatidis S; Pfannenberg C
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jan; 84(1):158-162. PubMed ID: 25467224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Quantitative studies using positron emission tomography (PET) for the diagnosis and therapy planning of oncological patients.
Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A; Strauss L
Hell J Nucl Med; 2006; 9(1):10-21. PubMed ID: 16617388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluation of Blob-Based Time-of-Flight PET Image Reconstruction in Hybrid Brain PET/MR Imaging.
Leemans EL; Kotasidis F; Wissmeyer M; Garibotto V; Zaidi H
Mol Imaging Biol; 2015 Oct; 17(5):704-13. PubMed ID: 25634260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of Positron Emission Tomography Quantification Using Magnetic Resonance- and Computed Tomography-Based Attenuation Correction in Physiological Tissues and Lesions: A Whole-Body Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Study in 66 Patients.
Seith F; Gatidis S; Schmidt H; Bezrukov I; la Fougère C; Nikolaou K; Pfannenberg C; Schwenzer N
Invest Radiol; 2016 Jan; 51(1):66-71. PubMed ID: 26348596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy.
Kinahan PE; Fletcher JW
Semin Ultrasound CT MR; 2010 Dec; 31(6):496-505. PubMed ID: 21147377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Image change detection using paradoxical theory for patient follow-up quantitation and therapy assessment.
David S; Visvikis D; Quellec G; Le Rest CC; Fernandez P; Allard M; Roux C; Hatt M
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2012 Sep; 31(9):1743-53. PubMed ID: 22614573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis.
Boellaard R
J Nucl Med; 2009 May; 50 Suppl 1():11S-20S. PubMed ID: 19380405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Impact of different image reconstructions on PET quantification in non-small cell lung cancer: a comparison of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma.
Messerli M; Kotasidis F; Burger IA; Ferraro DA; Muehlematter UJ; Weyermann C; Kenkel D; von Schulthess GK; Kaufmann PA; Huellner MW
Br J Radiol; 2019 Apr; 92(1096):20180792. PubMed ID: 30673302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Influence of reconstruction iterations on 18F-FDG PET/CT standardized uptake values.
Jaskowiak CJ; Bianco JA; Perlman SB; Fine JP
J Nucl Med; 2005 Mar; 46(3):424-8. PubMed ID: 15750154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Harmonizing FDG PET quantification while maintaining optimal lesion detection: prospective multicentre validation in 517 oncology patients.
Quak E; Le Roux PY; Hofman MS; Robin P; Bourhis D; Callahan J; Binns D; Desmonts C; Salaun PY; Hicks RJ; Aide N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2015 Dec; 42(13):2072-82. PubMed ID: 26219870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Significance of the impact of motion compensation on the variability of PET image features.
Carles M; Bach T; Torres-Espallardo I; Baltas D; Nestle U; Martí-Bonmatí L
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Mar; 63(6):065013. PubMed ID: 29469054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 18F-FDG-PET partial volume effect correction using a modified recovery coefficient approach based on functional volume and local contrast: physical validation and clinical feasibility in oncology.
Anouan KJ; Lelandais B; Edet-Sanson A; Ruan S; Vera P; Gardin I; Hapdey S
Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2017 Sep; 61(3):301-313. PubMed ID: 26407135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Partial volume correction strategies for quantitative FDG PET in oncology.
Hoetjes NJ; van Velden FH; Hoekstra OS; Hoekstra CJ; Krak NC; Lammertsma AA; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2010 Aug; 37(9):1679-87. PubMed ID: 20422184
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Investigation of realistic PET simulations incorporating tumor patient's specificity using anthropomorphic models: creation of an oncology database.
Papadimitroulas P; Loudos G; Le Maitre A; Hatt M; Tixier F; Efthimiou N; Nikiforidis GC; Visvikis D; Kagadis GC
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):112506. PubMed ID: 24320465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of strategies towards harmonization of FDG PET/CT studies in multicentre trials: comparison of scanner validation phantoms and data analysis procedures.
Makris NE; Huisman MC; Kinahan PE; Lammertsma AA; Boellaard R
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2013 Oct; 40(10):1507-15. PubMed ID: 23754762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Impact of PET/CT image reconstruction methods and liver uptake normalization strategies on quantitative image analysis.
Kuhnert G; Boellaard R; Sterzer S; Kahraman D; Scheffler M; Wolf J; Dietlein M; Drzezga A; Kobe C
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2016 Feb; 43(2):249-258. PubMed ID: 26280981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
