Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33990659›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Phantom and clinical assessment of small pulmonary nodules using Q.Clear reconstruction on a silicon-photomultiplier-based time-of-flight PET/CT system.

Zhifang Wu, Binwei Guo, Bin Huang, Xinzhong Hao, Ping Wu, Bin Zhao, Zhixing Qin, Jun Xie, Sijin Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. EnhancingCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhifang WuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Binwei GuoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Bin HuangDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Xinzhong HaoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Ping WuDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Bin ZhaoDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Zhixing QinDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Jun XieDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi, People's Republic of China.
Sijin LiDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, No. 85 South Jiefang Road, Taiyuan, 030001, Shanxi, People's Republic of China. lisjnm123@163.com.
Shanxi Medical University · CNFirst Hospital of Shanxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate the quantification accuracy of different positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT) reconstruction algorithms, we measured the recovery coefficient (RC) and contrast recovery (CR) in phantom studies. The results played a guiding role in the partial-volume-effect correction (PVC) for following clinical evaluations. The PET images were reconstructed with four different methods: ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM), OSEM with time-of-flight (TOF), OSEM with TOF and point spread function (PSF), and Bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL, known as Q.Clear in the PET/CT of GE Healthcare). In clinical studies, SUVmax and SUVmean (the maximum and mean of the standardized uptake values, SUVs) of 75 small pulmonary nodules (sub-centimeter group: < 10 mm and medium-size group: 10-25 mm) were measured from 26 patients. Results show that Q.Clear produced higher RC and CR values, which can improve quantification accuracy compared with other methods (P < 0.05), except for the RC of 37 mm sphere (P > 0.05). The SUVs of sub-centimeter fludeoxyglucose (FDG)-avid pulmonary nodules with Q.Clear illustrated highly significant differences from those reconstructed with other algorithms (P < 0.001). After performing the PVC, highly significant differences (P < 0.001) still existed in the SUVmean measured by Q.Clear comparing with those measured by the other algorithms. Our results suggest that the Q.Clear reconstruction algorithm improved the quantification accuracy towards the true uptake, which potentially promotes the diagnostic confidence and treatment response evaluations with PET/CT imaging, especially for the sub-centimeter pulmonary nodules. For small lesions, PVC is essential.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLungMaleMiddle AgedMultiple Pulmonary NodulesPhantoms, ImagingPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyRetrospective StudiesSignal-To-Noise RatioFluorodeoxyglucose F18Silicon

Identifiers

PMID33990659
PMCPMC8121798
OpenAlexW3161397778

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.