Trial reportJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2020
Reducing motion-correction-induced variability in
Trial report in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Motion Correction on Quantitative Perfusion Indices and Threshold-Based Interpretation inDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Dynamic frame-by-frame motion correction forEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Data-Driven Motion Correction Algorithm: Validation in [Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Integrated myocardial flow reserve (iMFR) assessment: optimized PET blood flow quantification for diagnosis of coronary artery disease.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Detection and correction of patient motion in dynamicJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Automated dynamic motion correction improves repeatability and reproducibility of myocardial blood flow quantification with rubidium-82 PET imaging.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023Article
- Inter- and Intraobserver Repeatability of Myocardial Flow Reserve Values Determined with SPECT Study Using a Discovery NM530c Camera and Corridor 4DM Software.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2020: positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Review
- Dynamic cardiac PET motion correction using 3D normalized gradient fields in patients and phantom simulations.Medical physics · 2021Article
- Optimizing accuracy and precision with motion correction of PET myocardial blood flow measurements.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Deriving myocardial blood flow reserve from perfusion datasets: Dream or reality?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Article
- Quantitative clinical nuclear cardiology, part 2: Evolving/emerging applications.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021Review
- Multiparametric CardiacIEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2020Article
- 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
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical use of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and flow reserve (MFR) is increasing. Motion correction is necessary to obtain accurate results but can introduce variability when performed manually. We sought to reduce that variability with an automated motion-correction algorithm.
methodsA blinded randomized controlled trial of two technologists was performed on the motion correction of 100 dynamic
resultsLimits of agreements between the two technologists decreased significantly for both MBF and MFR, going from [- 0.22, 0.22] mL/min/g and [- 0.31, 0.36] to [- 0.12, 0.15] mL/min/g and [- 0.15, 0.18], respectively (both P < .002). In addition, the average time spent on motion correcting decreased by 1 min per study from 5:21 to 4:21 min (P = .001).
conclusionsIn this randomized controlled trial, the use of automated motion correction significantly decreased inter-user variability and reduced processing time.
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.