ArticleIEEE transactions on nuclear science2016
A New Pulse Pileup Rejection Method Based on Position Shift Identification.
Article in IEEE transactions on nuclear science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A digital phoswich detector using time-over-threshold for depth of interaction in PET.Physics in medicine and biology · 2020Article
- Performance Evaluation of G8, a High-Sensitivity Benchtop Preclinical PET/CT Tomograph.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pulse pileup events degrade the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of nuclear medicine data. When such events occur in multiplexed detectors, they cause spatial misposition, energy spectrum distortion and degraded timing resolution, which leads to image artifacts. Pulse pileup is pronounced in PETbox4, a bench top PET scanner dedicated to high sensitivity and high resolution imaging of mice. In that system, the combination of high absolute sensitivity, long scintillator decay time (BGO) and highly multiplexed electronics lead to a significant fraction of pulse pileup, reached at lower total activity than for comparable instruments. In this manuscript, a new pulse pileup rejection method named position shift rejection (PSR) is introduced. The performance of PSR is compared with a conventional leading edge rejection (LER) method and with no pileup rejection implemented (NoPR). A comprehensive digital pulse library was developed for objective evaluation and optimization of the PSR and LER, in which pulse waveforms were directly recorded from real measurements exactly representing the signals to be processed. Physical measurements including singles event acquisition, peak system sensitivity and NEMA NU-4 image quality phantom were also performed in the PETbox4 system to validate and compare the different pulse pile-up rejection methods. The evaluation of both physical measurements and model pulse trains demonstrated that the new PSR performs more accurate pileup event identification and avoids erroneous rejection of valid events. For the PETbox4 system, this improvement leads to a significant recovery of sensitivity at low count rates, amounting to about 1/4th of the expected true coincidence events, compared to the LER method. Furthermore, with the implementation of PSR, optimal image quality can be achieved near the peak noise equivalent count rate (NECR).
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.