115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32693400)
1. A dedicated phantom design for positron emission mammography performance evaluation.
Torres-Urzúa LF; Alva-Sánchez H; Martínez-Dávalos A; García-Pérez FO; Peruyero-Rivas RM; Rodríguez-Villafuerte M
Phys Med Biol; 2020 Dec; 65(24):245003. PubMed ID: 32693400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Investigating the limit of detectability of a positron emission mammography device: a phantom study.
Shkumat NA; Springer A; Walker CM; Rohren EM; Yang WT; Adrada BE; Arribas E; Carkaci S; Chuang HH; Santiago L; Mawlawi OR
Med Phys; 2011 Sep; 38(9):5176-85. PubMed ID: 21978062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of fluorine-18 and bromine-76 imaging in positron emission tomography.
Ribeiro MJ; Almeida P; Strul D; Ferreira N; Loc'h C; Brulon V; Trébossen R; Mazière B; Bendriem B
Eur J Nucl Med; 1999 Jul; 26(7):758-66. PubMed ID: 10398824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical imaging characteristics of the positron emission mammography camera: PEM Flex Solo II.
MacDonald L; Edwards J; Lewellen T; Haseley D; Rogers J; Kinahan P
J Nucl Med; 2009 Oct; 50(10):1666-75. PubMed ID: 19759118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Dedicated phantom tools using traceable
Okamoto M; Hasegawa T; Oda K; Miyatake H; Kikuchi K; Inoue Y; Satoh Y; Inaoka Y; Kawamoto M; Shima K; Kanbayashi K; Yoshii M; Kanno T; Wagatsuma K; Hashimoto M
Radiol Phys Technol; 2023 Mar; 16(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 36622563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Positron emission mammography (PEM): effect of activity concentration, object size, and object contrast on phantom lesion detection.
Macdonald LR; Wang CL; Eissa M; Haseley D; Kelly MM; Liu F; Parikh JR; Beatty JD; Rogers JV
Med Phys; 2012 Oct; 39(10):6499-508. PubMed ID: 23039684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Development of a mechatronic guidance system for targeted ultrasound-guided biopsy under high-resolution positron emission mammography localization.
Park CKS; Bax JS; Gardi L; Knull E; Fenster A
Med Phys; 2021 Apr; 48(4):1859-1873. PubMed ID: 33577113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Image quality evaluation for a clinical organ-targeted PET camera.
Baldassi B; Poladyan H; Shahi A; Maa-Hacquoil H; Rapley M; Komarov B; Stiles J; Freitas V; Waterston M; Aseyev O; Reznik A; Bubon O
Front Oncol; 2024; 14():1268991. PubMed ID: 38590664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the quantitative accuracy of a commercially available positron emission mammography scanner.
Springer A; Mawlawi OR
Med Phys; 2011 Apr; 38(4):2132-9. PubMed ID: 21626946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical Imaging Characteristics of the Positron Emission Mammography PEM Flex Solo II.
Macdonald L; Edwards J; Lewellen T; Rogers J; Kinahan P
IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec (1997); 2008 Oct; 11(2008):4494-4501. PubMed ID: 20502537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Image improvement method for positron emission mammography.
Slavine NV; Seiler SJ; McColl RW; Lenkinski RE
Phys Med; 2017 Jul; 39():164-173. PubMed ID: 28688583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Performance evaluation of a high resolution dedicated breast PET scanner.
García Hernández T; Vicedo González A; Ferrer Rebolleda J; Sánchez Jurado R; Roselló Ferrando J; Brualla González L; Granero Cabañero D; Del Puig Cozar Santiago M
Med Phys; 2016 May; 43(5):2261. PubMed ID: 27147338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The positron emission mammography/tomography breast imaging and biopsy system (PEM/PET): design, construction and phantom-based measurements.
Raylman RR; Majewski S; Smith MF; Proffitt J; Hammond W; Srinivasan A; McKisson J; Popov V; Weisenberger A; Judy CO; Kross B; Ramasubramanian S; Banta LE; Kinahan PE; Champley K
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Feb; 53(3):637-53. PubMed ID: 18199907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The potential role of positron emission mammography for detection of breast cancer. A phantom study.
Raylman RR; Majewski S; Wojcik R; Weisenberger AG; Kross B; Popov V; Bishop HA
Med Phys; 2000 Aug; 27(8):1943-54. PubMed ID: 10984240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance evaluation of a whole-body prototype PET scanner with four-layer DOI detectors.
Akamatsu G; Tashima H; Iwao Y; Wakizaka H; Maeda T; Mohammadi A; Takyu S; Nitta M; Nishikido F; Rutherford H; Chacon A; Safavi-Naeini M; Yoshida E; Yamaya T
Phys Med Biol; 2019 Apr; 64(9):095014. PubMed ID: 30978704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Performance of a PSPMT based detector for scintimammography.
Williams MB; Williams MB; Goode AR; Galbis-Reig V; Majewski S; Weisenberger AG; Wojcik R
Phys Med Biol; 2000 Mar; 45(3):781-800. PubMed ID: 10730971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Technical Note: Transconvolution based equalization of positron energy effects for the use of
Prenosil GA; Hentschel M; Fürstner M; Krause T; Weitzel T; Klaeser B
Med Phys; 2017 Jul; 44(7):3761-3766. PubMed ID: 28494090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. NEMA NU-4 2008 performance evaluation of Xtrim-PET: A prototype SiPM-based preclinical scanner.
Amirrashedi M; Sarkar S; Ghafarian P; Hashemi Shahraki R; Geramifar P; Zaidi H; Ay MR
Med Phys; 2019 Nov; 46(11):4816-4825. PubMed ID: 31448421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of dedicated breast positron emission tomography and whole-body positron emission tomography/computed tomography images: a common phantom study.
Satoh Y; Motosugi U; Imai M; Onishi H
Ann Nucl Med; 2020 Feb; 34(2):119-127. PubMed ID: 31768819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of image quality with four positron emitters and three preclinical PET/CT systems.
Teuho J; Riehakainen L; Honkaniemi A; Moisio O; Han C; Tirri M; Liu S; Grönroos TJ; Liu J; Wan L; Liang X; Ling Y; Hua Y; Roivainen A; Knuuti J; Xie Q; Teräs M; D'Ascenzo N; Klén R
EJNMMI Res; 2020 Dec; 10(1):155. PubMed ID: 33301074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
