Reliability of SUV estimates in FDG PET as a function of acquisition and processing protocols
暂无分享,去创建一个
I. Buvat | J. Feuardent | O. de Dreuille | I. Buvat | M. Soret | H. Foehrenbach | M. Soret | H. Foehrenbach | O. de Dreuille | J. Feuardent
[1] D. Visvikis,et al. CT-based attenuation correction in the calculation of semi-quantitative indices of [18F]FDG uptake in PET , 2003, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
[2] F Bénard,et al. Clinical evaluation of processing techniques for attenuation correction with 137Cs in whole-body PET imaging. , 1999, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.
[3] Irène Buvat,et al. Quantitative accuracy of dopaminergic neurotransmission imaging with (123)I SPECT. , 2003, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.
[4] R. Wahl,et al. PET/CT: comparison of quantitative tracer uptake between germanium and CT transmission attenuation-corrected images. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.
[5] D Visvikis,et al. Influence of OSEM and segmented attenuation correction in the calculation of standardised uptake values for [18F]FDG PET. , 2001, European journal of nuclear medicine.
[6] R. Reznek,et al. CT assessment of tumour response to treatment: comparison of linear, cross-sectional and volumetric measures of tumour size. , 2000, The British journal of radiology.
[7] I. Buvat,et al. Biases affecting the measurements of tumor-to-background activity ratio in PET , 2002 .