Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41188529›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026

Critical review of partial volume correction methods in PET and SPECT imaging: benefits, pitfalls, challenges, and future outlook.

Mohammad Saber Azimi, Arman Rahmim, Hossein Arabi, Amirhossein Sanaat, Navid Zeraatkar, Yassine Bouchareb, Chi Liu, Abass Alavi, Michael King, Ronald Boellaard and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Physiological uptake patterns of gastric lymph node stations onQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

11 authors.

Mohammad Saber AzimiDepartment of Medical Radiation Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-8037-3071
Arman RahmimDepartments of Radiology and Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9980-2403
Hossein ArabiDivision of Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, CH-1211, Switzerland.
Amirhossein SanaatDivision of Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, CH-1211, Switzerland.
Navid ZeraatkarDepartment of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Yassine BoucharebDepartment of Radiology & Molecular Imaging, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, 123, Oman.
Chi LiuDepartment of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Abass AlaviDepartment of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2442-7901
Michael KingDepartment of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Ronald BoellaardDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0313-5686
Habib ZaidiDivision of Nuclear Medicine & Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, CH-1211, Switzerland. habib.zaidi@hcuge.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-7559-5297

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePartial volume effects (PVE) remain a major challenge in quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) imaging, often compromising both accuracy and reproducibility. While numerous Partial Volume Correction (PVC) methods have been proposed, their clinical translation is still limited. This review provides a clinically oriented evaluation of PVC methods with a particular focus on state-of-the-art applications in neurology, cardiovascular imaging, oncology, and radiopharmaceutical therapy dosimetry, highlighting where these techniques offer the greatest added value. In addition, we outline which PVC techniques have the potential to be used in clinical practice and which remain primarily suited for research purposes, along with their suitability in each of the above-mentioned clinical domains. Finally, this review addresses the central question of whether PVC is essential in clinical practice or whether its impact is context dependent.

methodsThis review categorizes PVC approaches into three partially overlapping classes: reconstruction-based, post-reconstruction-based, and AI-driven or hybrid methods. Each class is further divided into anatomical and non-anatomical subcategories. We systematically compare their clinical applicability across key dimensions: quantitative accuracy, lesion detectability, robustness to noise and artifacts, anatomical dependence, generalizability across scanners and tracers, and clinical readiness.

resultsPVC techniques often improve quantitative accuracy in small structures and in regions affected by spill-over from adjacent high-uptake tissues. However, these benefits can come at the cost of increased noise or edge artifacts, which may limit their robustness for routine clinical use. Post-reconstruction methods are sensitive to segmentation errors, while AI-driven models, despite their promise, require further validation using clinical benchmarks, comparison to ground truth, and testing on diverse datasets. Issues, such as generalizability and interpretability remain significant barriers.

conclusionThis review emphasizes the importance of application-tailored PVC protocols for reliable quantitative imaging in neurology, cardiology, oncology, and radiopharmaceutical therapy dosimetry. Not all PVC methods are beneficial; some may even impair interpretation in certain contexts. We provide a practical overview of which PVC approaches are most beneficial for each clinical scenario, aiming to guide both researchers and clinicians in selecting appropriate techniques for future studies and routine practice, and also outline key areas requiring further development for broader integration into research and clinical workflows.

Indexed as

Image Processing, Computer-AssistedPositron-Emission TomographyTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonHumansAnatomical informationImage reconstructionPartial volume correction (PVC)PETQuantitative imagingSPECT

Identifiers

PMID41188529
PMCPMC12920307

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.