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.
3. Myocardial perfusion in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: comparison between 320-MDCT and rubidium-82 PET. Dantas RN; Assuncao AN; Marques IA; Fahel MG; Nomura CH; Avila LFR; Giorgi MCP; Soares J; Meneghetti JC; Parga JR Eur Radiol; 2018 Jun; 28(6):2665-2674. PubMed ID: 29352381 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. ⁸²Rb PET myocardial perfusion imaging is superior to ⁹⁹mTc-labelled agent SPECT in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. Flotats A; Bravo PE; Fukushima K; Chaudhry MA; Merrill J; Bengel FM Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2012 Aug; 39(8):1233-9. PubMed ID: 22648514 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of treadmill exercise versus dipyridamole stress with myocardial perfusion imaging using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography. Chow BJ; Ananthasubramaniam K; dekemp RA; Dalipaj MM; Beanlands RS; Ruddy TD J Am Coll Cardiol; 2005 Apr; 45(8):1227-34. PubMed ID: 15837254 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Impact of rubidium imaging availability on management of patients with acute chest pain. Shaukat Ali A; Finnerty V; Harel F; Marquis-Gravel G; Vadeboncoeur A; Pelletier-Galarneau M J Nucl Cardiol; 2022 Dec; 29(6):3281-3290. PubMed ID: 35199279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Ischemic burden assessment of myocardial perfusion CT, compared with SPECT using semi-quantitative and quantitative approaches. Kwon O; Hwang HJ; Koo HJ; Yang DH; Kang HJ; Kim JA; Moon DH; Kim HS; Kang JW; Kim YH Int J Cardiol; 2019 Mar; 278():287-294. PubMed ID: 30587418 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Does quantification of myocardial flow reserve using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography facilitate detection of multivessel coronary artery disease? Ziadi MC; Dekemp RA; Williams K; Guo A; Renaud JM; Chow BJ; Klein R; Ruddy TD; Aung M; Garrard L; Beanlands RS J Nucl Cardiol; 2012 Aug; 19(4):670-80. PubMed ID: 22415819 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Added value of coronary artery calcium score in the reporting of SPECT versus PET myocardial perfusion imaging. Mouden M; Jager PL; van Dalen JA; van Dijk JD J Nucl Cardiol; 2022 Oct; 29(5):2448-2456. PubMed ID: 34476779 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic performances of Rubidium-PET and SPECT with CZT camera for the detection of myocardial ischemia in a population of women and overweight individuals. Hyafil F; Chequer R; Sorbets E; Estellat C; Ducrocq G; Rouzet F; Alfaiate T; Regaieg H; Abtan J; Leygnac S; Milliner M; Imbert L; Burg S; Ben Azzouna R; Potier L; Laouénan C; Quintin C; Roussel R; Hartemann A; Montalescot G; Marie PY; Steg G; Le Guludec D J Nucl Cardiol; 2020 Jun; 27(3):755-768. PubMed ID: 30574676 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prognostic value of vasodilator response using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with coronary artery disease. Arasaratnam P; Sadreddini M; Yam Y; Kansal V; Dorbala S; Di Carli MF; Beanlands RS; Merhige ME; Williams BA; Veledar E; Min JK; Chen L; Ruddy TD; Germano G; Berman DS; Shaw LJ; Chow BJW Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2018 Apr; 45(4):538-548. PubMed ID: 29177706 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Influence of sex on risk stratification with stress myocardial perfusion Rb-82 positron emission tomography: Results from the PET (Positron Emission Tomography) Prognosis Multicenter Registry. Kay J; Dorbala S; Goyal A; Fazel R; Di Carli MF; Einstein AJ; Beanlands RS; Merhige ME; Williams BA; Veledar E; Chow BJ; Min JK; Berman DS; Shah S; Bellam N; Butler J; Shaw LJ J Am Coll Cardiol; 2013 Nov; 62(20):1866-76. PubMed ID: 23850903 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of attenuation, dual-energy-window, and model-based scatter correction of low-count SPECT to 82Rb PET/CT quantified myocardial perfusion scores. Wells RG; Soueidan K; Timmins R; Ruddy TD J Nucl Cardiol; 2013 Oct; 20(5):785-96. PubMed ID: 23737161 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Semi-quantitative myocardial perfusion measured by computed tomography in patients with refractory angina: a head-to-head comparison with quantitative rubidium-82 positron emission tomography as reference. Qayyum AA; Kühl JT; Kjaer A; Hasbak P; Kofoed KF; Kastrup J Clin Physiol Funct Imaging; 2017 Sep; 37(5):481-488. PubMed ID: 26625937 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. What is the prognostic value of myocardial perfusion imaging using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography? Yoshinaga K; Chow BJ; Williams K; Chen L; deKemp RA; Garrard L; Lok-Tin Szeto A; Aung M; Davies RA; Ruddy TD; Beanlands RS J Am Coll Cardiol; 2006 Sep; 48(5):1029-39. PubMed ID: 16949498 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Diagnostic value of automated quantification of nuclear cardiology in Japanese patients with single vessel coronary artery disease: comparison between Japanese and American normal databases. Yoda S; Nakanishi K; Tano A; Hori Y; Suzuki Y; Matsumoto N; Hirayama A J Cardiol; 2013 Oct; 62(4):224-9. PubMed ID: 23731920 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. To quantify or not to quantify, that is the question: Semi-quantitative vs. visual analysis of Rb-82 myocardial perfusion imaging PET. Rischpler C; Kersting D; Nekolla SG J Nucl Cardiol; 2022 Dec; 29(6):3163-3165. PubMed ID: 35274212 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]