Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29205378›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2018

Cardiac-gated parametric images from

Mary Germino, Richard E Carson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Enhanced accuracy of cardiacEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Myocardial blood flow: Is motion correction necessary?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  4. Patient motion correction for dynamic cardiac PET: Current status and challenges.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Dynamic cardiac PET imaging: Technological improvements advancing future cardiac health.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    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

2 authors.

Mary GerminoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Yale University, P. O. Box 208048, New Haven, CT, 06520-8048, USA.
Richard E CarsonDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Yale University, P. O. Box 208048, New Haven, CT, 06520-8048, USA.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Yale University Clinical and Translational Science Award ProgramUL1TR000142 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI SHERWIN, ROBERT S · 2012 to 2015
$31.8M
State-of-the-Art Small Animal PET/CT InstrumentationS10OD010322 · OD · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CARSON, RICHARD E. · 2013 to 2013
$595k
Hybrid parametric/non-parametric direct reconstruction for dynamic PETF31EB018720 · NIBIB · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI GERMINO, MARY · 2014 to 2016
$73k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000142NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIBIB NIH HHS F31 EB018720NIH HHS S10 OD010322
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCardiac perfusion PET data can be reconstructed as a dynamic sequence and kinetic modeling performed to quantify myocardial blood flow, or reconstructed as static gated images to quantify function. Parametric images from dynamic PET are conventionally not gated, to allow use of all events with lower noise. An alternative method for dynamic PET is to incorporate the kinetic model into the reconstruction algorithm itself, bypassing the generation of a time series of emission images and directly producing parametric images. So-called "direct reconstruction" can produce parametric images with lower noise than the conventional method because the noise distribution is more easily modeled in projection space than in image space. In this work, we develop direct reconstruction of cardiac-gated parametric images for

methodsPMOLAR-1T was extended to accommodate model terms to account for spillover from the left and right ventricles into the myocardium. The algorithm was evaluated on a 4D simulated

resultsConvergence of direct reconstruction was slow with uniform initialization; lower bias was achieved in fewer iterations by initializing with the filtered indirect iteration 1 images. For most parameters and regions evaluated, the direct method achieved the same or lower absolute bias at matched iteration as the indirect method, with 23%-65% lower noise. Additionally, the direct method gave better contrast between the perfusion defect and surrounding normal tissue than the indirect method. Gated parametric images from the human dataset had comparable relative performance of indirect and direct, in terms of mean parameter values per iteration. Changes in myocardial wall thickness and blood pool size across gates were readily visible in the gated parametric images, with higher contrast between myocardium and left ventricle blood pool in parametric images than gated SUV images.

conclusionsDirect reconstruction can produce parametric images with less noise than the indirect method, opening the potential utility of gated parametric imaging for perfusion PET.

Indexed as

Cardiac-Gated Imaging TechniquesPositron-Emission TomographyRubidium RadioisotopesAlgorithmsHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalKineticsModels, TheoreticalSignal-To-Noise RatioRubidium-82Rubidium Radioisotopescardiac PETdirect PET reconstructionkinetic modelingparametric imaging

Identifiers

PMID29205378
PMCPMC5807225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.