Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39834159›Full record

ArticleNuclear medicine communications2025

Qualitative and quantitative analysis of reduced bed position acquisition time on FDG PET image quality.

Michael Ting, Garry McDermott, Amir Zarei, Chirag Patel, Fahmid U Chowdhury, Andreia Rodrigues, Andrew F Scarsbrook

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nuclear medicine communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Michael TingDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, .
Garry McDermottDepartment of Medical Physics & Engineering, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, .
Amir ZareiDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, .
Chirag PatelDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, .
Fahmid U ChowdhuryDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, .
Andreia RodriguesLeeds PET Centre, Alliance Medical Ltd, St James's University Hospital and .
Andrew F ScarsbrookDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, .

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study aim was to evaluate whether reducing bed position acquisition time would result in significant detriment to image quality. Secondary aims were to compare effect of time of flight (TOF) and Q.Clear reconstructions and patient BMI on image quality. Fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT performed in 30 patients on a new scanner at our institution between March and May 2024 was retrospectively evaluated. Four PET reconstructions were performed: (a) 1 min 45 s TOF, (b) 2 min TOF, (c) 1 min 45 s Q.Clear, and (d) 2 min Q.Clear. For qualitative analysis, four maximum intensity projection images were evaluated side-by-side using a five-point visual score (1 = non-diagnostic, 5 = excellent). For quantitative analysis, liver signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was calculated. A statistically significant reduction in visual score occurred when reducing bed position time from 2 min to 1 min 45 s (mean TOF scores 0.24 reduction, P = 0.0002; mean Q.Clear scores 0.04 reduction, P  = 0.02. There was also a statistically significant difference in liver SNR when reducing bed position time. Deterioration in image quality was minimised when bed position acquisition time was reduced if Q.Clear construction was utilized. This could facilitate increased scanning capacity without clinical detriment.

Indexed as

BedsFluorodeoxyglucose F18Image Processing, Computer-AssistedPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality ControlRetrospective StudiesSignal-To-Noise RatioTime FactorsFluorodeoxyglucose F18

Identifiers

PMID39834159
PMCPMC11878577

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.