164 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27806605)
1. Technical Note: Rod phantom analysis for comparison of PET detector sampling and reconstruction methods.
Wollenweber SD; Kemp BJ
Med Phys; 2016 Nov; 43(11):6175. PubMed ID: 27806605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Using compressive sensing to recover images from PET scanners with partial detector rings.
Valiollahzadeh S; Clark JW; Mawlawi O
Med Phys; 2015 Jan; 42(1):121-33. PubMed ID: 25563253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Physical performance of the new hybrid PET∕CT Discovery-690.
Bettinardi V; Presotto L; Rapisarda E; Picchio M; Gianolli L; Gilardi MC
Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5394-411. PubMed ID: 21992359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Quantitative PET/CT scanner performance characterization based upon the society of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging clinical trials network oncology clinical simulator phantom.
Sunderland JJ; Christian PE
J Nucl Med; 2015 Jan; 56(1):145-52. PubMed ID: 25525180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. (90)Y -PET imaging: Exploring limitations and accuracy under conditions of low counts and high random fraction.
Carlier T; Willowson KP; Fourkal E; Bailey DL; Doss M; Conti M
Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):4295-309. PubMed ID: 26133627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. CT head-scan dosimetry in an anthropomorphic phantom and associated measurement of ACR accreditation-phantom imaging metrics under clinically representative scan conditions.
Brunner CC; Stern SH; Minniti R; Parry MI; Skopec M; Chakrabarti K
Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081917. PubMed ID: 23927331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessment of volumetric noise and resolution performance for linear and nonlinear CT reconstruction methods.
Chen B; Christianson O; Wilson JM; Samei E
Med Phys; 2014 Jul; 41(7):071909. PubMed ID: 24989387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Performance comparison of two resolution modeling PET reconstruction algorithms in terms of physical figures of merit used in quantitative imaging.
Matheoud R; Ferrando O; Valzano S; Lizio D; Sacchetti G; Ciarmiello A; Foppiano F; Brambilla M
Phys Med; 2015 Jul; 31(5):468-75. PubMed ID: 25979211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Performance evaluation of the GE healthcare eXplore VISTA dual-ring small-animal PET scanner.
Wang Y; Seidel J; Tsui BM; Vaquero JJ; Pomper MG
J Nucl Med; 2006 Nov; 47(11):1891-900. PubMed ID: 17079824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantification and homogenization of image noise between two CT scanner models.
Einstein SA; Rong XJ; Jensen CT; Liu X
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2020 Jan; 21(1):174-178. PubMed ID: 31859454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Beyond 18F-FDG: Characterization of PET/CT and PET/MR Scanners for a Comprehensive Set of Positron Emitters of Growing Application--18F, 11C, 89Zr, 124I, 68Ga, and 90Y.
Soderlund AT; Chaal J; Tjio G; Totman JJ; Conti M; Townsend DW
J Nucl Med; 2015 Aug; 56(8):1285-91. PubMed ID: 26135111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A gate evaluation of the sources of error in quantitative
Strydhorst J; Carlier T; Dieudonné A; Conti M; Buvat I
Med Phys; 2016 Oct; 43(10):5320-5329. PubMed ID: 28105711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of PET and SPECT phantom image quality through automated binary classification of cold rod arrays.
DiFilippo FP
Med Phys; 2019 Aug; 46(8):3451-3461. PubMed ID: 31115055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Technical Note: Evaluation of a 160-mm/256-row CT scanner for whole-heart quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging.
So A; Imai Y; Nett B; Jackson J; Nett L; Hsieh J; Wisenberg G; Teefy P; Yadegari A; Islam A; Lee TY
Med Phys; 2016 Aug; 43(8):4821. PubMed ID: 27487900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Image reconstructions from super-sampled data sets with resolution modeling in PET imaging.
Li Y; Matej S; Metzler SD
Med Phys; 2014 Dec; 41(12):121912. PubMed ID: 25471972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accurate Monte Carlo modeling and performance assessment of the X-PET subsystem of the FLEX triumph preclinical PET/CT scanner.
Zeraatkar N; Ay MR; Kamali-Asl AR; Zaidi H
Med Phys; 2011 Mar; 38(3):1217-25. PubMed ID: 21520834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Evaluation of the spline reconstruction technique for PET.
Kastis GA; Kyriakopoulou D; Gaitanis A; Fernández Y; Hutton BF; Fokas AS
Med Phys; 2014 Apr; 41(4):042501. PubMed ID: 24694154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Quantitative image reconstruction for total-body PET imaging using the 2-meter long EXPLORER scanner.
Zhang X; Zhou J; Cherry SR; Badawi RD; Qi J
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 62(6):2465-2485. PubMed ID: 28240215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
