Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26728160›Full record

ArticleMolecular imaging and biology2016

Impact of New Scatter Correction Strategies on High-Resolution Research Tomograph Brain PET Studies.

Syahir Mansor, Ronald Boellaard, Marc C Huisman, Bart N M van Berckel, Robert C Schuit, Albert D Windhorst, Adriaan A Lammertsma, Floris H P van Velden

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular imaging and biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Syahir MansorDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ronald BoellaardDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. r.boellaard@vumc.nl.
Marc C HuismanDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bart N M van BerckelDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Robert C SchuitDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Albert D WindhorstDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Adriaan A LammertsmaDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Floris H P van VeldenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of different scatter correction strategies on quantification of high-resolution research tomograph (HRRT) data for three tracers covering a wide range in kinetic profiles. PROCEDURES: Healthy subjects received dynamic HRRT scans using either (R)-[(11)C]verapamil (n = 5), [(11)C]raclopride (n = 5) or [(11)C]flumazenil (n = 5). To reduce the effects of patient motion on scatter scaling factors, a margin in the attenuation correction factor (ACF) sinogram was applied prior to 2D or 3D single scatter simulation (SSS).

resultsSome (R)-[(11)C]verapamil studies showed prominent artefacts that disappeared with an ACF-margin of 10 mm or more. Use of 3D SSS for (R)-[(11)C]verapamil showed a statistically significant increase in volume of distribution compared with 2D SSS (p < 0.05), but not for [(11)C]raclopride and [(11)C]flumazenil studies (p > 0.05).

conclusionsWhen there is a patient motion-induced mismatch between transmission and emission scans, applying an ACF-margin resulted in more reliable scatter scaling factors but did not change (and/or deteriorate) quantification.

Indexed as

Scattering, RadiationBrainHumansMiddle AgedMotionPositron-Emission TomographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedACF-marginHigh-resolution research tomograph (HRRT)Patient motionPositron emission tomography (PET)Scatter correctionScatter scaling factorSingle scatter simulation

Identifiers

PMID26728160
PMCPMC4927607
OpenAlexW2224702820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.