ArticleEJNMMI physics2021
Yttrium-90 quantitative phantom study using digital photon counting PET.
Article in EJNMMI physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimising [Formula: see text] PET imaging for dosimetry in SIRT: insights from phantom and simulation studies on the Discovery MI scanner.EJNMMI physics · 2026Article
- Y-90 PET/MR imaging optimization with a Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- An Evaluation of 90Y Bremsstrahlung SPECT Image Quality in the Presence of 99mTc: A Technical Perspective on Same-Day Radioembolization.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Article
- Phantom-based evaluation of yttrium-90 datasets using biograph vision quadra.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- Lesion Quantification Accuracy of DigitalJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPET imaging of
methodsQuantitative PET and dosimetry accuracy were evaluated using two uniform cylindrical phantoms specific for PET calibration validation. A third body phantom with a 9:1 hot sphere-to-background ratio was scanned at different activity concentrations of
resultsUsing a 2-mm full width at half maximum post-reconstruction Gaussian filter, the dosimetric accuracy was found to be similar to that found with no filter applied but also reduced noise. Larger filter sizes should not be used. An acquisition length of more than 10 min/bed reduces image noise but has no significant impact in the quantification of phantom or patient data for the digital photon counting PET. 3 iterations with 10 subsets were found suitable for large spheres whereas 1 iteration with 30 subsets could improve dosimetry for smaller spheres.
conclusionThe best choice of the combination of iterations and subsets depends on the size of the spheres. However, one should be careful on this choice, depending on the imaging conditions and setup. This study can be useful in this choice for future studies for more accurate
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.