ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2018
Motion Correction and Its Impact on Absolute Myocardial Blood Flow Measures with PET.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improved myocardial blood flow estimation with residual activity correction and motion correction inEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Trial
- The impact of motion correction on quantitatively measured perfusion indices using cardiac-dedicated dynamic CZT-SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Data-Driven Motion Correction Algorithm: Validation in [Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Pulmonary blood flow quantification in humans from 15O-water PET.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2025Article
- Detection and correction of patient motion in dynamicJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Dynamic cardiac PET motion correction using 3D normalized gradient fields in patients and phantom simulations.Medical physics · 2021Article
- Assessment of motion correction in dynamic rubidium-82 cardiac PET with and without frame-by-frame adjustment of attenuation maps for calculation of myocardial blood flow.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Short-term repeatability of myocardial blood flow usingJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Comparative analysis between myocardial perfusion reserve and maximal ischemia score at single photon emission computed tomography with new-generation cadmium-zinc-telluride cameras.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Observational
- EANM procedural guidelines for PET/CT quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Motion correction to enhance absolute myocardial blood flow quantitation by PET.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020Article
- MR-based cardiac and respiratory motion correction of PET: application to static and dynamic cardiacPhysics in medicine and biology · 2019Article
- Impact of regadenoson-induced myocardial creep on dynamic Rubidium-82 PET myocardial blood flow quantification.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019Article
- No need for frame-wise attenuation correction in dynamic Rubidium-82 PET for myocardial blood flow quantification.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019Article
- Gating Approaches in Cardiac PET Imaging.PET clinics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewMotion artifacts, due to cardiac and respiratory cycles, myocardial cardiac creep, or gross patient movements, have been extensively investigated in the context of relative myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT and PET. These movements have been identified as a major source of errors in image quantification and diagnosis. Recently, as dynamic PET quantification for myocardial blood flow assessment has entered clinical practice, similar questions have arisen on the impact of motion on final blood flow values. RECENT
findingsWhile preliminary investigations have underlined the potential impact of these motions on MBF quantification, their correction on dynamic acquisition remains challenging and limited to research studies. Gross patient's body movements occur in a consistent number of cases, particularly during stress acquisition, typically involving a limited number of image frames. If undetected, these movements can lead to great differences in flow values and consequently misdiagnosis. Quality control routines can be applied to automatically inspect the shape of time activity curves and to help identify motion artifacts. Cyclic cardiac and respiratory motion may have a considerable impact on final flow values. Correction of gross body motion represents a priority in the context of optimizing absolute flow clinical routine utilization and protocol standardization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29574494What 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.