ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2019
Comparison of image quality and lesion detection between digital and analog PET/CT.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 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
45 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Evaluation Study of PET Image Quality Factors in Brain Tumor Diagnosis.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Article
- Digital versus analogue PET in parathyroid imaging: comparison of PET metrics and machine learning-based characterisation of hyperfunctioning lesions (the DIGI-PET study).European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Lung lesion detectability on images obtained from decimated and CNN-based denoised [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Implantation of an Artificial Intelligence Denoising Algorithm Using SubtlePET™ with Various Radiotracers: 18F-FDG, 68Ga PSMA-11 and 18F-FDOPA, Impact on the Technologist Radiation Doses.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Long-axial field-of-view PET/CT improves radiomics feature reliability.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025Article
- Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Digital Versus Analog PET/CT for Lymph Node Metastases and Glut-1 Correlation in Resected Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
- Recent advances in radionuclide medical imaging techniques.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Focal Unspecific Bone Uptake on [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Influence of Covariates onDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The clinical acceptability of short versus long duration acquisitions for head and neck cancer using long-axial field-of-view PET/CT: a retrospective evaluation.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Comparative study of physiological FDG uptake in small structures between silicon photomultiplier-based PET and conventional PET.Annals of nuclear medicine · 2024Article
- Long-axial field-of-view PET/CT for the assessment of inflammation in calcified coronary artery plaques with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Investigating the influence of long-axial versus short-axial field of view PET/CT on stage migration in lymphoma and non-small cell lung cancer.Nuclear medicine communications · 2023Article
- Potential Clinical Impact of LAFOV PET/CT: A Systematic Evaluation of Image Quality and Lesion Detection.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Deep Learning Denoising Improves and Homogenizes Patient [Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Long-axial field-of-view PET/CT: perspectives and review of a revolutionary development in nuclear medicine based on clinical experience in over 7000 patients.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023Review
- Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- Detection efficacy of analog [European radiology · 2023Article
- The uptake of [Frontiers in transplantation · 2023Article
- Artificial intelligence guided enhancement of digital PET: scans as fast as CT?European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare image quality and lesion detection capability between a digital and an analog PET/CT system in oncological patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred oncological patients (62 men, 38 women; mean age of 65 ± 12 years) were prospectively included from January-June 2018. All patients, who accepted to be scanned by two systems, consecutively underwent a single day, dual imaging protocol (digital and analog PET/CT). Three nuclear medicine physicians evaluated image quality using a 4-point scale (-1, poor; 0, fair; 1, good; 2, excellent) and detection capability by counting the number of lesions with increased radiotracer uptake. Differences were considered significant for a p value <0.05.
resultsImproved image quality in the digital over the analog system was observed in 54% of the patients (p = 0.05, 95% CI, 44.2-63.5). The percentage of interrater concordance in lesion detection capability between the digital and analog systems was 97%, with an interrater measure agreement of κ = 0.901 (p < 0.0001). Although there was no significant difference in the total number of lesions detected by the two systems (digital: 5.03 ± 10.6 vs. analog: 4.53 ± 10.29; p = 0.7), the digital system detected more lesions in 22 of 83 of PET+ patients (26.5%) (p = 0.05, 95% CI, 17.9-36.7). In these 22 patients, all lesions detected by the digital PET/CT (and not by the analog PET/CT) were < 10 mm.
conclusionDigital PET/CT offers improved image quality and lesion detection capability over the analog PET/CT in oncological patients, and even better for sub-centimeter lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30631910What 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.