284 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29599404)
41. Optimization of
Alqahtani MM; Willowson KP; Constable C; Fulton R; Kench PL
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2022 Apr; 23(4):e13528. PubMed ID: 35049129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Effect of varying number of OSEM subsets on PET lesion detectability.
Morey AM; Kadrmas DJ
J Nucl Med Technol; 2013 Dec; 41(4):268-73. PubMed ID: 24221921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. The association of tumor-to-background ratios and SUVmax deviations related to point spread function and time-of-flight F18-FDG-PET/CT reconstruction in colorectal liver metastases.
Rogasch JM; Steffen IG; Hofheinz F; Großer OS; Furth C; Mohnike K; Hass P; Walke M; Apostolova I; Amthauer H
EJNMMI Res; 2015; 5():31. PubMed ID: 25992306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. The impact of reconstruction algorithms and time of flight information on PET/CT image quality.
Suljic A; Tomse P; Jensterle L; Skrk D
Radiol Oncol; 2015 Sep; 49(3):227-33. PubMed ID: 26401127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Effect of Tumor-Pixel Positioning on the Variability of SUV Measurements in PET Images.
Itagaki K; Mitsumoto K; Kajisako M; Shioji M; Kawase S
Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol; 2023; 11(1):71-81. PubMed ID: 36619185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. How to harmonize SUVs obtained by hybrid PET/CT scanners with and without point spread function correction.
Ferretti A; Chondrogiannis S; Rampin L; Bellan E; Marzola MC; Grassetto G; Gusella S; Maffione AM; Gava M; Rubello D
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Nov; 63(23):235010. PubMed ID: 30474620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. The influence of different signal-to-background ratios on spatial resolution and F18-FDG-PET quantification using point spread function and time-of-flight reconstruction.
Rogasch JM; Hofheinz F; Lougovski A; Furth C; Ruf J; Großer OS; Mohnike K; Hass P; Walke M; Amthauer H; Steffen IG
EJNMMI Phys; 2014 Dec; 1(1):12. PubMed ID: 26501454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. New standards for phantom image quality and SUV harmonization range for multicenter oncology PET studies.
Akamatsu G; Shimada N; Matsumoto K; Daisaki H; Suzuki K; Watabe H; Oda K; Senda M; Terauchi T; Tateishi U
Ann Nucl Med; 2022 Feb; 36(2):144-161. PubMed ID: 35029817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Evaluation of data-driven respiratory gating for subcentimeter lesions using digital PET/CT system and three-axis motion phantom.
Fukai S; Daisaki H; Shimada N; Ishiyama M; Umeda T; Yamashita K; Miyaji N; Takiguchi T; Kawakami H; Terauchi T
Biomed Phys Eng Express; 2022 Dec; 9(1):. PubMed ID: 36541506
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Spatial resolution and image qualities of Zr-89 on Siemens Biograph TruePoint PET/CT.
Lee YS; Kim JS; Kim JY; Kim BI; Lim SM; Kim HJ
Cancer Biother Radiopharm; 2015 Feb; 30(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 25549151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Comparing lesion detection efficacy and image quality across different PET system generations to optimize the iodine-124 PET protocol for recurrent thyroid cancer.
Kersting D; Jentzen W; Sraieb M; Costa PF; Conti M; Umutlu L; Antoch G; Nader M; Herrmann K; Fendler WP; Rischpler C; Weber M
EJNMMI Phys; 2021 Feb; 8(1):14. PubMed ID: 33587222
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of Yttrium-90 PET/CT imaging.
Attarwala AA; Molina-Duran F; Büsing KA; Schönberg SO; Bailey DL; Willowson K; Glatting G
PLoS One; 2014; 9(11):e110401. PubMed ID: 25369020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Noise reduction using a Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm on a time-of-flight PET-CT scanner.
Caribé PRRV; Koole M; D'Asseler Y; Van Den Broeck B; Vandenberghe S
EJNMMI Phys; 2019 Dec; 6(1):22. PubMed ID: 31823084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Influences of point-spread function and time-of-flight reconstructions on standardized uptake value of lymph node metastases in FDG-PET.
Akamatsu G; Mitsumoto K; Taniguchi T; Tsutsui Y; Baba S; Sasaki M
Eur J Radiol; 2014 Jan; 83(1):226-30. PubMed ID: 24144448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Applications of both time of flight and point spread function in brain PET image reconstruction.
Shao X; Shao X; Wang X; Wang Y
Nucl Med Commun; 2016 Apr; 37(4):422-7. PubMed ID: 26637071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Reliability of predicting image signal-to-noise ratio using noise equivalent count rate in PET imaging.
Chang T; Chang G; Clark JW; Diab RH; Rohren E; Mawlawi OR
Med Phys; 2012 Oct; 39(10):5891-900. PubMed ID: 23039628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. A second-generation virtual-pinhole PET device for enhancing contrast recovery and improving lesion detectability of a whole-body PET/CT scanner.
Jiang J; Li K; Wang Q; Puterbaugh K; Young JW; Siegel SB; O'Sullivan JA; Tai YC
Med Phys; 2019 Sep; 46(9):4165-4176. PubMed ID: 31315157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Isotope independent determination of PET/CT modulation transfer functions from phantom measurements on spheres.
Prenosil GA; Klaeser B; Hentschel M; Fürstner M; Berndt M; Krause T; Weitzel T
Med Phys; 2016 Oct; 43(10):5767. PubMed ID: 27782715
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. The usefulness of fully three-dimensional OSEM algorithm on lymph node metastases from lung cancer with 18F-FDG PET/CT.
Inoue K; Moriya E; Suzuki T; Ohnuki Y; Sato T; Kitamura H; Sasaki T; Fukushi M; Moriyama N; Fujii H
Ann Nucl Med; 2011 May; 25(4):277-87. PubMed ID: 21234724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. 3D-OSEM versus FORE + OSEM: Optimal Reconstruction Algorithm for FDG PET with a Short Acquisition Time.
Tsuda K; Suzuki T; Toya K; Sato E; Fujii H
World J Nucl Med; 2023 Sep; 22(3):234-243. PubMed ID: 37854086
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
