ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Deep progressive learning reconstruction for fast and low-dose whole-body PET scans in an integrated PET/MR system.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPET/MR combines molecular and functional imaging but faces challenges such as prolonged scans, noise from reduced tracer activity, and suboptimal reconstruction methods (e.g., OSEM). Deep learning techniques, such as deep progressive learning (DPL), show promise in enhancing low-tracer activity PET/CT imaging but remain understudied for PET/MR. As MR acquisition continues to accelerate through technological advances, adaptive PET reconstruction methods will become increasingly important for maintaining overall throughput in integrated PET/MR protocols. This study evaluates DPL on a uPMR790 PET/MR system to determine its potential for reducing injected activity or scan durations in whole-body [
methodsIn our study, we included 115 patients for whole-body PET/MR examinations, of whom 100 received a full injected activity of [
resultsAccording to subjective visual assessment methods, DPL scores were significantly higher than OSEM, with DPL1 achieving the highest scores. The advantage of DPL1 became more pronounced with shorter reconstruction times. In both the full injected activity and half injected activity groups, at one-quarter of the reconstruction time, the average Likert visual scores for OSEM and DPL1 were 2.36 vs. 4.01 in the full injected activity group and 1.23 vs. 3.21 in the half injected activity group, respectively (P < 0.01). Compared to the OSEM group, the DPL1 group exhibited significantly improved image quality with markedly reduced noise; the SNR, CNR, contrast, COV, and TBR values were all significantly higher than those of OSEM. These gains were still observable in obese patients within the DPL1 group. There were no significant differences in the lesion SUVmax and SUVmean measured between the OSEM and DPL1 groups (all P > 0.05); however, lesion volumes measured from DPL1 were smaller than those in the OSEM group.
conclusionsDPL reconstruction suggests that it may be feasible to reduce the administered activity of [
Indexed as
Identifiers
42458316What 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.