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.
138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37060633)
1. Impact of patient's habitus on image quality and quantitative metrics in 18F-FDG PET/CT images. Zorz A; D'Alessio A; Guida F; Ramadan RM; Richetta E; Cuppari L; Pellerito R; Sacchetti GM; Brambilla M; Paiusco M; Stasi M; Matheoud R Phys Med; 2023 May; 109():102584. PubMed ID: 37060633 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of prone versus supine 18F-FDG-PET of locally advanced breast cancer: Phantom and preliminary clinical studies. Williams JM; Rani SD; Li X; Arlinghaus LR; Lee TC; MacDonald LR; Partridge SC; Kang H; Whisenant JG; Abramson RG; Linden HM; Kinahan PE; Yankeelov TE Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3801-13. PubMed ID: 26133582 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Standardized Uptake Values of Tlostanova MS; Chipiga LA Sovrem Tekhnologii Med; 2021; 13(3):15-23. PubMed ID: 34603751 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Total-body Hu P; Zhang Y; Yu H; Chen S; Tan H; Qi C; Dong Y; Wang Y; Deng Z; Shi H Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2021 Jul; 48(8):2384-2394. PubMed ID: 33866409 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The role of activity, scan duration and patient's body mass index in the optimization of FDG imaging protocols on a TOF-PET/CT scanner. Matheoud R; Al-Maymani N; Oldani A; Sacchetti GM; Brambilla M; Carriero A EJNMMI Phys; 2021 Apr; 8(1):35. PubMed ID: 33825058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of image quality between step-and-shoot and continuous bed motion techniques in whole-body Yamashita S; Yamamoto H; Nakaichi T; Yoneyama T; Yokoyama K Ann Nucl Med; 2017 Nov; 31(9):686-695. PubMed ID: 28815414 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Simulated Reduced-Count Whole-Body FDG PET: Evaluation in Children and Young Adults Imaged on a Digital PET Scanner. Alves VPV; Brady S; Ata NA; Li Y; MacLean J; Zhang B; Sharp SE; Trout AT AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 Dec; 219(6):952-961. PubMed ID: 35731102 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Radiotracer dose reduction in integrated PET/MR: implications from national electrical manufacturers association phantom studies. Oehmigen M; Ziegler S; Jakoby BW; Georgi JC; Paulus DH; Quick HH J Nucl Med; 2014 Aug; 55(8):1361-7. PubMed ID: 25006216 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Impact of PET/CT system, reconstruction protocol, data analysis method, and repositioning on PET/CT precision: An experimental evaluation using an oncology and brain phantom. Mansor S; Pfaehler E; Heijtel D; Lodge MA; Boellaard R; Yaqub M Med Phys; 2017 Dec; 44(12):6413-6424. PubMed ID: 28994465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Artificial intelligence-based PET denoising could allow a two-fold reduction in [ Weyts K; Lasnon C; Ciappuccini R; Lequesne J; Corroyer-Dulmont A; Quak E; Clarisse B; Roussel L; Bardet S; Jaudet C Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2022 Sep; 49(11):3750-3760. PubMed ID: 35593925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Clinical respiratory motion correction software (reconstruct, register and averaged-RRA), for Bouyeure-Petit AC; Chastan M; Edet-Sanson A; Becker S; Thureau S; Houivet E; Vera P; Hapdey S Br J Radiol; 2017 Feb; 90(1070):20160549. PubMed ID: 27936893 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. More advantages in detecting bone and soft tissue metastases from prostate cancer using Pianou NK; Stavrou PZ; Vlontzou E; Rondogianni P; Exarhos DN; Datseris IE Hell J Nucl Med; 2019; 22(1):6-9. PubMed ID: 30843003 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Optimization of a shorter variable-acquisition time for legs to achieve true whole-body PET/CT images. Umeda T; Miwa K; Murata T; Miyaji N; Wagatsuma K; Motegi K; Terauchi T; Koizumi M Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2017 Dec; 40(4):861-868. PubMed ID: 29098601 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Time-of-flight PET/CT using low-activity protocols: potential implications for cancer therapy monitoring. Murray I; Kalemis A; Glennon J; Hasan S; Quraishi S; Beyer T; Avril N Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2010 Aug; 37(9):1643-53. PubMed ID: 20428866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Image Quality and Activity Optimization in Oncologic van Sluis J; Boellaard R; Dierckx RAJO; Stormezand GN; Glaudemans AWJM; Noordzij W J Nucl Med; 2020 May; 61(5):764-771. PubMed ID: 31628214 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Phantom-based acquisition time and image reconstruction parameter optimisation for oncologic FDG PET/CT examinations using a digital system. Fragoso Costa P; Jentzen W; Brahmer A; Mavroeidi IA; Zarrad F; Umutlu L; Fendler WP; Rischpler C; Herrmann K; Conti M; Seifert R; Sraieb M; Weber M; Kersting D BMC Cancer; 2022 Aug; 22(1):899. PubMed ID: 35978274 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Investigation of 18F-FDG 3D mode PET image quality versus acquisition time. Brown C; Dempsey MF; Gillen G; Elliott AT Nucl Med Commun; 2010 Mar; 31(3):254-9. PubMed ID: 20032801 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]