ArticleEJNMMI physics2017
An experimental phantom study of the effect of gadolinium-based MR contrast agents on PET attenuation coefficients and PET quantification in PET-MR imaging: application to cardiac studies.
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gadolinium-based coronary CT angiography on a clinical photon-counting-detector system: a dynamic circulating phantom study.European radiology experimental · 2024Article
- The effect of high count rates on cardiac perfusion quantification in a simultaneous PET-MR system using a cardiac perfusion phantom.EJNMMI physics · 2017Article
- Feasibility of simultaneous PET-MR perfusion using a novel cardiac perfusion phantom.European journal of hybrid imaging · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSimultaneous cardiac perfusion studies are an increasing trend in PET-MR imaging. During dynamic PET imaging, the introduction of gadolinium-based MR contrast agents (GBCA) at high concentrations during a dual injection of GBCA and PET radiotracer may cause increased attenuation effects of the PET signal, and thus errors in quantification of PET images. We thus aimed to calculate the change in linear attenuation coefficient (LAC) of a mixture of PET radiotracer and increasing concentrations of GBCA in solution and furthermore, to investigate if this change in LAC produced a measurable effect on the image-based PET activity concentration when attenuation corrected by three different AC strategies.
findingsWe performed simultaneous PET-MR imaging of a phantom in a static scenario using a fixed activity of 40 MBq [18 F]-NaF, water, and an increasing GBCA concentration from 0 to 66 mM (based on an assumed maximum possible concentration of GBCA in the left ventricle in a clinical study). This simulated a range of clinical concentrations of GBCA. We investigated two methods to calculate the LAC of the solution mixture at 511 keV: (1) a mathematical mixture rule and (2) CT imaging of each concentration step and subsequent conversion to LAC at 511 keV. This comparison showed that the ranges of LAC produced by both methods are equivalent with an increase in LAC of the mixed solution of approximately 2% over the range of 0-66 mM. We then employed three different attenuation correction methods to the PET data: (1) each PET scan at a specific millimolar concentration of GBCA corrected by its corresponding CT scan, (2) each PET scan corrected by a CT scan with no GBCA present (i.e., at 0 mM GBCA), and (3) a manually generated attenuation map, whereby all CT voxels in the phantom at 0 mM were replaced by LAC = 0.1 cm
conclusionThe presence of high GBCA concentration (representing a worst-case scenario in dynamic cardiac studies) in solution with PET radiotracer produces a minimal effect on attenuation-corrected PET quantification.
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.