ArticleAnnals of nuclear medicine2025
Crossover evaluation of time-of-flight-based attenuation correction in brain
Article in Annals of nuclear medicine, 2025. 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.
- Beyond CT: Attenuation correction for stand-alone brain PET.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2026Review
- Off-target binding ofAnnals of nuclear medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBrain-dedicated positron emission tomography (PET) systems offer high spatial resolution and sensitivity for accurate clinical assessments. Attenuation correction (AC) is important in PET imaging, particularly in brain studies. This study assessed the reproducibility of attenuation maps (µ-maps) generated by a specialized time-of-flight (TOF) brain-dedicated PET system for imaging using different PET tracers.
methodsTwelve subjects underwent both
resultsSmall but significant differences in µ-maps were observed between tracers, primarily in bone regions. In the comparison between the µ-maps obtained with FDG-PET and FMM-PET, the µ-maps obtained with FDG-PET had higher µ-values than those obtained with FMM-PET in the parietal regions of the head and skull, in a portion of the cerebellar dentate nucleus and on the surface of the frontal lobe. The comparison between FDG and FDG × FMM values in different regions yielded findings similar to those of the µ-maps comparison. FDG × FMM values were significantly higher than FDG values in the bilateral temporal bones and a small part of the temporal lobe. Similarly, FMM values were significantly higher than FMM × FDG values in the bilateral temporal bones. FMM × FDG values were significantly higher than FMM values in a small area of the right cerebellar hemisphere. However, the relative errors in these µ-maps were within ± 4%, suggesting that they are clinically insignificant. In PET images reconstructed with the original and swapped µ-maps, the relative errors were within ± 7% and the quality was nearly equivalent.
conclusionThese findings suggest the clinical reliability of the AC method without an external radiation source in TOF brain-dedicated PET systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39347876What 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.