English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the image quality in cardiac 18F-FDG PET using the time of flight (TOF) and/or point spread function (PSF) modeling in the iterative reconstruction (IR). Three scanners and an anthropomorphic cardiac phantom with an insert simulating a transmural defect (TD) were used. Two sets of scans (with/without TD) were acquired, and four reconstruction schemes were considered: (1) IR; (2) IR + PSF, (3) IR + TOF, and (4) IR + TOF + PSF. LV wall thickness (FWHM), contrast between LV wall and inner chamber (C IC), and TD contrast in LV wall (C TD) were evaluated. Tests of the reconstruction protocols showed a decrease in FWHM from IR (13 mm) to IR + PSF (11 mm); an increase in the C IC from IR (65%) to IR + PSF (71%) and from IR + TOF (72%) to IR + TOF + PSF (77%); and an increase in the C TD from IR + PSF (72%) to IR + TOF (75%) and to IR + TOF + PSF (77%). Tests of the scanner/software combinations showed a decrease in FWHM from Gemini_TF (13 mm) to Biograph_mCT (12 mm) and to Discovery_690 (11 mm); an increase in the C IC from Gemini_TF (65%) to Biograph_mCT (73%) and to Discovery_690 (75%); and an increase in the C TD from Gemini_TF/Biograph_mCT (72%) to Discovery_690 (77%). The introduction of TOF and PSF increases image quality in cardiac 18F-FDG PET. The scanner/software combinations exhibit different performances, which should be taken into consideration when making cross comparisons.

journal of nuclear cardiology

Erratum to: Comparative analysis of iterative reconstruction algorithms with resolution recovery and time of flight modeling for 18F-FDG cardiac PET: A multicenter phantom study