Commentary: an eye on PET quantification.

Positron emission tomography (PET) is generally considered to be a quantitative imaging modality, allowing assessment of regional differences in radiotracer accumulation and the derivation of quantitative physiological information. Due to the increasing complexity of PET technology, the quantitative...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Molecular Imaging & Biology Vol. 17; no. 1; pp. 1 - 4
Autores principales: Walker, Matthew D, Sossi, Vesna
Formato: Journal Article
Publicado: Springer Nature Feb2015
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=109693796&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 109693796
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        15361632
        KJU
      jtl: Molecular Imaging & Biology
      issn: 15361632
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Feb2015
      vid: 17
      iid: 1
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        109693796
        NLM25238997
        2012875263
        10.1007/s11307-014-0791-7
        NLM25238997
        109693796
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 3
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Commentary: an eye on PET quantification.
      aug:
        au:
          Walker, Matthew D
          Sossi, Vesna
      sug:
      ab: Positron emission tomography (PET) is generally considered to be a quantitative imaging modality, allowing assessment of regional differences in radiotracer accumulation and the derivation of quantitative physiological information. Due to the increasing complexity of PET technology, the quantitative accuracy of PET images has to be continually reassessed if PET is to maintain its quantitative reputation. In this commentary, we discuss the results from a recent inter-scanner study in which the quantitative outcome measures from human studies were compared for three different radiotracers. The approach is a useful complement to standard phantom tests such as those prescribed by NEMA, but the resulting data are more difficult to interpret.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N