ArticleJournal of medical physics
Optimization of Reconstruction Parameters for Discovery 710 Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to optimize the quantitative aspects of ( Materials and Methods: The study utilized the "Vue Point FX + Sharp IR" algorithm for PET image reconstruction, incorporating 3D-ordered subset expectation maximization (3D-OSEM), time-of-flight, and point spread function technologies. Various reconstruction parameters were explored, including two distinct matrix sizes, multiple iterations, subsets, and a wide range of Gaussian postfilters. The investigation focused on the impact of these parameters on RCs using the NEMA image quality phantom. Results: The results of the study indicated that for accurate SUV quantification in spheres ≥17 mm, the 256 × 256 matrix size and mean SUV should be employed. Conversely, for spheres ≤13 mm, maximum SUV was found to be more suitable. The choice of postfiltering value was shown to have a significant impact on SUV quantification accuracy, particularly for small-sized spheres. In addition, a larger matrix size was found to partially mitigate the effects of Gibbs artifact and slightly enhance SUV quantification for the spheres of various sizes. Conclusion: This study highlights the critical importance of optimizing PET reconstruction parameters in accordance with the guidelines set by European Association of Nuclear Medicine/EARL. By optimizing these parameters, the accuracy and reliability of SUV quantification in (
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.