A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Effect of Attenuation Correction on Regional Quantification Between PET/MR and PET/CT: A Multicenter Study Using a 3-Dimensional Brain Phantom. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Unlabelled: A spatial bias in brain PET/MR exists compared with PET/CT, because of MR-based attenuation correction. We performed an evaluation among 4 institutions, 3 PET/MR systems, and 4 PET/CT systems using an anthropomorphic brain phantom, hypothesizing that the spatial bias would be minimized with CT-based attenuation correction (CTAC).

Methods: The evaluation protocol was similar to the quantification of changes in neurologic PET studies. Regional analysis was conducted on 8 anatomic volumes of interest (VOIs) in gray matter on count-normalized, resolution-matched, coregistered data. On PET/MR systems, CTAC was applied as the reference method for attenuation correction.

Results: With CTAC, visual and quantitative differences between PET/MR and PET/CT systems were minimized. Intersystem variation between institutions was +3.42% to -3.29% in all VOIs for PET/CT and +2.15% to -4.50% in all VOIs for PET/MR. PET/MR systems differed by +2.34% to -2.21%, +2.04% to -2.08%, and -1.77% to -5.37% when compared with a PET/CT system at each institution, and these differences were not significant (P ≥ 0.05).

Conclusion: Visual and quantitative differences between PET/MR and PET/CT systems can be minimized by an accurate and standardized method of attenuation correction. If a method similar to CTAC can be implemented for brain PET/MRI, there is no reason why PET/MR should not perform as well as PET/CT.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.166165DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

attenuation correction
16
pet/mr pet/ct
12
pet/mr systems
12
pet/ct systems
12
pet/mr
9
pet/ct
8
brain phantom
8
spatial bias
8
compared pet/ct
8
method attenuation
8

Similar Publications