ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2010
Absolute quantitative total-body small-animal SPECT with focusing pinholes.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization and calibration of the iQID digital autoradiography system for direct quantitative imaging of beta-emitters in tissue samples.Medical physics · 2026Article
- Pre-clinical SPECT and SPECT-CT in Oncology.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026Review
- Quantitative dual-isotope preclinical SPECT/CT imaging and biodistribution of the mercury-197m/g theranostic pair with [EJNMMI radiopharmacy and chemistry · 2025Article
- Individual and Simultaneous Imaging ofIEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2025Article
- Quantitative SPECT imaging ofEJNMMI physics · 2024Article
- Performance evaluation of a preclinical SPECT/CT system for multi-animal and multi-isotope quantitative experiments.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Quantification of Myocardial Perfusion Defect Size in Rats: Comparison between Quantitative Perfusion SPECT and Autoradiography.Molecular imaging and biology · 2018Article
- In vivo Biodistribution of Radiolabeled Acoustic Protein Nanostructures.Molecular imaging and biology · 2018Article
- Quantitative SPECT imaging and biodistribution point to molecular weight independent tumor uptake for some long-circulating polymer nanocarriers.RSC advances · 2018Article
- Implementation of absolute quantification in small-animal SPECT imaging: Phantom and animal studies.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2017Article
- The role of preclinical SPECT in oncological and neurological research in combination with either CT or MRI.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2014Review
- Performance evaluation of small-animal multipinhole μSPECT scanners for mouse imaging.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2013Article
- The performance of MLEM for dynamic imaging from simulated few-view, multi-pinhole SPECT.IEEE transactions on nuclear science · 2013Article
- Effects of attenuation map accuracy on attenuation-corrected micro-SPECT images.EJNMMI research · 2013Article
- Investigation of attenuation correction for small-animal single photon emission computed tomography.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2013Article
- Pinhole micro-SPECT/CT for noninvasive monitoring and quantitation of oncolytic virus dispersion and percent infection in solid tumors.Gene therapy · 2012Article
- Targeted multi-pinhole SPECT.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2011Article
- Quantitative Accuracy of Low-Count SPECT Imaging in Phantom and In Vivo Mouse Studies.International journal of molecular imaging · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn pinhole SPECT, attenuation of the photon flux on trajectories between source and pinholes affects quantitative accuracy of reconstructed images. Previously we introduced iterative methods that compensate for image degrading effects of detector and pinhole blurring, pinhole sensitivity and scatter for multi-pinhole SPECT. The aim of this paper is (1) to investigate the accuracy of the Chang algorithm in rodents and (2) to present a practical Chang-based method using body outline contours obtained with optical cameras.
methodsHere we develop and experimentally validate a practical method for attenuation correction based on a Chang first-order method. This approach has the advantage that it is employed after, and therefore independently from, iterative reconstruction. Therefore, no new system matrix has to be calculated for each specific animal. Experiments with phantoms and animals were performed with a high-resolution focusing multi-pinhole SPECT system (U-SPECT-II, MILabs, The Netherlands). This SPECT system provides three additional optical camera images of the animal for each SPECT scan from which the animal contour can be estimated.
resultsPhantom experiments demonstrated that an average quantification error of -18.7% was reduced to -1.7% when both window-based scatter correction and Chang correction based on the body outline from optical images were applied. Without scatter and attenuation correction, quantification errors in a sacrificed rat containing sources with known activity ranged from -23.6 to -9.3%. These errors were reduced to values between -6.3 and +4.3% (with an average magnitude of 2.1%) after applying scatter and Chang attenuation correction.
conclusionWe conclude that the modified Chang correction based on body contour combined with window-based scatter correction is a practical method for obtaining small-animal SPECT images with high quantitative accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.