ArticleIEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences2022
Attenuation Coefficient Estimation for PET/MRI With Bayesian Deep Learning Pseudo-CT and Maximum-Likelihood Estimation of Activity and Attenuation.
Article in IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A two-stage PET/MRI attenuation-correction workflow for pseudo-CT and AC PET synthesis with GUI-based inference.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Accuracy and Longitudinal Consistency of PET/MR Attenuation Correction in Amyloid PET Imaging amid Software and Hardware Upgrades.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- A review of PET attenuation correction methods for PET-MR.EJNMMI physics · 2023Review
- Emerging Trends in Fast MRI Using Deep-Learning Reconstruction on Undersampled k-Space Data: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Convex optimization algorithms in medical image reconstruction-in the age of AI.Physics in medicine and biology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A major remaining challenge for magnetic resonance-based attenuation correction methods (MRAC) is their susceptibility to sources of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) artifacts (e.g., implants and motion) and uncertainties due to the limitations of MRI contrast (e.g., accurate bone delineation and density, and separation of air/bone). We propose using a Bayesian deep convolutional neural network that in addition to generating an initial pseudo-CT from MR data, it also produces uncertainty estimates of the pseudo-CT to quantify the limitations of the MR data. These outputs are combined with the maximum-likelihood estimation of activity and attenuation (MLAA) reconstruction that uses the PET emission data to improve the attenuation maps. With the proposed approach uncertainty estimation and pseudo-CT prior for robust MLAA (UpCT-MLAA), we demonstrate accurate estimation of PET uptake in pelvic lesions and show recovery of metal implants. In patients without implants, UpCT-MLAA had acceptable but slightly higher root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) than Zero-echotime and Dixon Deep pseudo-CT when compared to CTAC. In patients with metal implants, MLAA recovered the metal implant; however, anatomy outside the implant region was obscured by noise and crosstalk artifacts. Attenuation coefficients from the pseudo-CT from Dixon MRI were accurate in normal anatomy; however, the metal implant region was estimated to have attenuation coefficients of air. UpCT-MLAA estimated attenuation coefficients of metal implants alongside accurate anatomic depiction outside of implant regions.
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.