ArticleIEEE Nuclear Science Symposium conference record. Nuclear Science Symposium2011
Generation and Evaluation of a Simultaneous Cardiac and Respiratory Gated Rb-82 PET Simulation.
Article in IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium conference record. Nuclear Science Symposium, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Digital anthropomorphic phantoms of non-rigid human respiratory and voluntary body motion for investigating motion correction in emission imaging.Physics in medicine and biology · 2014Article
- Development of a 4D Digital Phantom for Tracer Kinetic Modeling and Analysis of Dynamic Perfusion PET and SPECT Simulation Studies.IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium conference record. Nuclear Science Symposium · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The goal is to generate and evaluate a simulated 4D Rb-82 PET dataset that realistically models simultaneous respiratory and cardiac motions for use to study the effects of the motions and their compensation using various gating schemes. Normal cardiac and respiratory (C&R) motions were simulated separately using the realistic 4D XCAT phantoms. The C&R motion cycles were divided into 24 and 48 equally-spaced time points, respectively. The simultaneous dual motions were modeled by 24 × 48 phantoms with different combinations of C&R motion phases. Almost noise-free projections of the heart, blood pool, lungs, liver, stomach, spleen, and the remaining body were simulated separately using the combined SimSET and GATE Monte Carlo simulation program which is 12 times faster than GATE alone. The projections were scaled and combined to simulate a typical Rb-82 myocardial perfusion (MP) PET patient study. The no gating, 6-frame respiratory gating only, 8-frame cardiac gating only, and simultaneous 6-frame respiratory and 8-frame cardiac gating schemes were applied. Each gated projection dataset was reconstructed using a 2D OS-EM without and with attenuation correction (AC) using an averaged and gated attenuation maps. The reconstructed images were evaluated in terms of artifactual non-uniformity in the MP polar map. Significant artifactual non-uniformity was found in the MP polar map over all gating scheme without AC. With AC, the artifactual decreases in both the anterior and inferior regions were reduced with respiratory gating. Cardiac motion alone did not cause significant artifactual non-uniformity. In addition, the combination of dual gating and AC using the gated attenuation map provided the most uniform MP polar map. We demonstrated the flexibility and utility of the 4D XCAT phantom set with simultaneous C&R motions. It is a powerful tool to study motion effects on MP PET studies and to evaluate C&R gating schemes, AC and quantitative 4D PET image reconstruction methods.
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.