Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging

Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Sousa, João M. [verfasserIn] Appel, Lieuwe [verfasserIn] Merida, Inés [verfasserIn] Heckemann, Rolf A. [verfasserIn] Costes, Nicolas [verfasserIn] Engström, Mathias [verfasserIn] Papadimitriou, Stergios [verfasserIn] Nyholm, Dag [verfasserIn] Ahlström, Håkan [verfasserIn] Hammers, Alexander [verfasserIn] Lubberink, Mark [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2020

Schlagwörter:	MRAC ZTE Atlas MaxProb Dopamine transporter Binding potential rCBF

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: EJNMMI Physics - Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014, 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez.
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:7 ; year:2020 ; number:1 ; day:28 ; month:12

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2

Katalog-ID:	SPR042525012

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	SPR042525012
003	DE-627
005	20230519150442.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	201229s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR042525012
035			\|a (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e
035			\|a (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 530 \|a 610 \|q ASE
100	1		\|a Sousa, João M. \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
264		1	\|c 2020
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.
650		4	\|a MRAC \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a ZTE \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Atlas \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a MaxProb \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Dopamine transporter \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Binding potential \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a rCBF \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Appel, Lieuwe \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Merida, Inés \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Heckemann, Rolf A. \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Costes, Nicolas \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Engström, Mathias \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Papadimitriou, Stergios \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Nyholm, Dag \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Ahlström, Håkan \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Hammers, Alexander \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Lubberink, Mark \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t EJNMMI Physics \|d Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014 \|g 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. \|w (DE-627)785697993 \|w (DE-600)2768912-8 \|x 2197-7364 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:7 \|g year:2020 \|g number:1 \|g day:28 \|g month:12
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2446
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 7 \|j 2020 \|e 1 \|b 28 \|c 12

Indexfelder

author_variant	j m s jm jms l a la i m im r a h ra rah n c nc m e me s p sp d n dn h a ha a h ah m l ml
matchkey_str	article:21977364:2020----::cuaynpeiinfeocoieigenmlitaatnainorcinodn
hierarchy_sort_str	2020
publishDate	2020
allfields	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 doi (DE-627)SPR042525012 (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 530 610 ASE Sousa, João M. verfasserin aut Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling. MRAC (dpeaa)DE-He213 ZTE (dpeaa)DE-He213 Atlas (dpeaa)DE-He213 MaxProb (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dopamine transporter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Binding potential (dpeaa)DE-He213 rCBF (dpeaa)DE-He213 Appel, Lieuwe verfasserin aut Merida, Inés verfasserin aut Heckemann, Rolf A. verfasserin aut Costes, Nicolas verfasserin aut Engström, Mathias verfasserin aut Papadimitriou, Stergios verfasserin aut Nyholm, Dag verfasserin aut Ahlström, Håkan verfasserin aut Hammers, Alexander verfasserin aut Lubberink, Mark verfasserin aut Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. (DE-627)785697993 (DE-600)2768912-8 2197-7364 nnns volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2020 1 28 12
spelling	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 doi (DE-627)SPR042525012 (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 530 610 ASE Sousa, João M. verfasserin aut Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling. MRAC (dpeaa)DE-He213 ZTE (dpeaa)DE-He213 Atlas (dpeaa)DE-He213 MaxProb (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dopamine transporter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Binding potential (dpeaa)DE-He213 rCBF (dpeaa)DE-He213 Appel, Lieuwe verfasserin aut Merida, Inés verfasserin aut Heckemann, Rolf A. verfasserin aut Costes, Nicolas verfasserin aut Engström, Mathias verfasserin aut Papadimitriou, Stergios verfasserin aut Nyholm, Dag verfasserin aut Ahlström, Håkan verfasserin aut Hammers, Alexander verfasserin aut Lubberink, Mark verfasserin aut Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. (DE-627)785697993 (DE-600)2768912-8 2197-7364 nnns volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2020 1 28 12
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 doi (DE-627)SPR042525012 (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 530 610 ASE Sousa, João M. verfasserin aut Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling. MRAC (dpeaa)DE-He213 ZTE (dpeaa)DE-He213 Atlas (dpeaa)DE-He213 MaxProb (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dopamine transporter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Binding potential (dpeaa)DE-He213 rCBF (dpeaa)DE-He213 Appel, Lieuwe verfasserin aut Merida, Inés verfasserin aut Heckemann, Rolf A. verfasserin aut Costes, Nicolas verfasserin aut Engström, Mathias verfasserin aut Papadimitriou, Stergios verfasserin aut Nyholm, Dag verfasserin aut Ahlström, Håkan verfasserin aut Hammers, Alexander verfasserin aut Lubberink, Mark verfasserin aut Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. (DE-627)785697993 (DE-600)2768912-8 2197-7364 nnns volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2020 1 28 12
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 doi (DE-627)SPR042525012 (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 530 610 ASE Sousa, João M. verfasserin aut Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling. MRAC (dpeaa)DE-He213 ZTE (dpeaa)DE-He213 Atlas (dpeaa)DE-He213 MaxProb (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dopamine transporter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Binding potential (dpeaa)DE-He213 rCBF (dpeaa)DE-He213 Appel, Lieuwe verfasserin aut Merida, Inés verfasserin aut Heckemann, Rolf A. verfasserin aut Costes, Nicolas verfasserin aut Engström, Mathias verfasserin aut Papadimitriou, Stergios verfasserin aut Nyholm, Dag verfasserin aut Ahlström, Håkan verfasserin aut Hammers, Alexander verfasserin aut Lubberink, Mark verfasserin aut Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. (DE-627)785697993 (DE-600)2768912-8 2197-7364 nnns volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2020 1 28 12
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 doi (DE-627)SPR042525012 (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 530 610 ASE Sousa, João M. verfasserin aut Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging 2020 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling. MRAC (dpeaa)DE-He213 ZTE (dpeaa)DE-He213 Atlas (dpeaa)DE-He213 MaxProb (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dopamine transporter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Binding potential (dpeaa)DE-He213 rCBF (dpeaa)DE-He213 Appel, Lieuwe verfasserin aut Merida, Inés verfasserin aut Heckemann, Rolf A. verfasserin aut Costes, Nicolas verfasserin aut Engström, Mathias verfasserin aut Papadimitriou, Stergios verfasserin aut Nyholm, Dag verfasserin aut Ahlström, Håkan verfasserin aut Hammers, Alexander verfasserin aut Lubberink, Mark verfasserin aut Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. (DE-627)785697993 (DE-600)2768912-8 2197-7364 nnns volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2020 1 28 12
language	English
source	Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12
sourceStr	Enthalten in EJNMMI Physics 7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez. volume:7 year:2020 number:1 day:28 month:12
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	MRAC ZTE Atlas MaxProb Dopamine transporter Binding potential rCBF
dewey-raw	530
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	EJNMMI Physics
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Sousa, João M. @@aut@@ Appel, Lieuwe @@aut@@ Merida, Inés @@aut@@ Heckemann, Rolf A. @@aut@@ Costes, Nicolas @@aut@@ Engström, Mathias @@aut@@ Papadimitriou, Stergios @@aut@@ Nyholm, Dag @@aut@@ Ahlström, Håkan @@aut@@ Hammers, Alexander @@aut@@ Lubberink, Mark @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2020-12-28T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	785697993
dewey-sort	3530
id	SPR042525012
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR042525012</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519150442.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201229s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR042525012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">530</subfield><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sousa, João M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">MRAC</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">ZTE</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Atlas</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">MaxProb</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dopamine transporter</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Binding potential</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">rCBF</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Appel, Lieuwe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Merida, Inés</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Heckemann, Rolf A.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Costes, Nicolas</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Engström, Mathias</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Papadimitriou, Stergios</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nyholm, Dag</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahlström, Håkan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hammers, Alexander</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lubberink, Mark</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">EJNMMI Physics</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)785697993</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2768912-8</subfield><subfield code="x">2197-7364</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:7</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:28</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">7</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">28</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Sousa, João M.
spellingShingle	Sousa, João M. ddc 530 misc MRAC misc ZTE misc Atlas misc MaxProb misc Dopamine transporter misc Binding potential misc rCBF Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
authorStr	Sousa, João M.
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)785697993
format	electronic Article
dewey-ones	530 - Physics 610 - Medicine & health
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	2197-7364
topic_title	530 610 ASE Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging MRAC (dpeaa)DE-He213 ZTE (dpeaa)DE-He213 Atlas (dpeaa)DE-He213 MaxProb (dpeaa)DE-He213 Dopamine transporter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Binding potential (dpeaa)DE-He213 rCBF (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	ddc 530 misc MRAC misc ZTE misc Atlas misc MaxProb misc Dopamine transporter misc Binding potential misc rCBF
topic_unstemmed	ddc 530 misc MRAC misc ZTE misc Atlas misc MaxProb misc Dopamine transporter misc Binding potential misc rCBF
topic_browse	ddc 530 misc MRAC misc ZTE misc Atlas misc MaxProb misc Dopamine transporter misc Binding potential misc rCBF
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	EJNMMI Physics
hierarchy_parent_id	785697993
dewey-tens	530 - Physics 610 - Medicine & health
hierarchy_top_title	EJNMMI Physics
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)785697993 (DE-600)2768912-8
title	Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR042525012 (DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e (SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e
title_full	Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
author_sort	Sousa, João M.
journal	EJNMMI Physics
journalStr	EJNMMI Physics
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
dewey-hundreds	500 - Science 600 - Technology
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2020
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Sousa, João M. Appel, Lieuwe Merida, Inés Heckemann, Rolf A. Costes, Nicolas Engström, Mathias Papadimitriou, Stergios Nyholm, Dag Ahlström, Håkan Hammers, Alexander Lubberink, Mark
container_volume	7
class	530 610 ASE
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Sousa, João M.
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2
dewey-full	530 610
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11c]pe2i pet-mr brain imaging
title_auth	Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
abstract	Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.
abstractGer	Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.
abstract_unstemmed	Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2
remote_bool	true
author2	Appel, Lieuwe Merida, Inés Heckemann, Rolf A. Costes, Nicolas Engström, Mathias Papadimitriou, Stergios Nyholm, Dag Ahlström, Håkan Hammers, Alexander Lubberink, Mark
author2Str	Appel, Lieuwe Merida, Inés Heckemann, Rolf A. Costes, Nicolas Engström, Mathias Papadimitriou, Stergios Nyholm, Dag Ahlström, Håkan Hammers, Alexander Lubberink, Mark
ppnlink	785697993
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2
up_date	2024-07-04T02:17:15.352Z
_version_	1803613042486804480
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR042525012</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519150442.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201229s2020 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR042525012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)SPRs40658-020-00347-2-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s40658-020-00347-2-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">530</subfield><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sousa, João M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background A valid photon attenuation correction (AC) method is instrumental for obtaining quantitatively correct PET images. Integrated PET/MR systems provide no direct information on attenuation, and novel methods for MR-based AC (MRAC) are still under investigation. Evaluations of various AC methods have mainly focused on static brain PET acquisitions. In this study, we determined the validity of three MRAC methods in a dynamic PET/MR study of the brain. Methods Nine participants underwent dynamic brain PET/MR scanning using the dopamine transporter radioligand [11C]PE2I. Three MRAC methods were evaluated: single-atlas (Atlas), multi-atlas (MaxProb) and zero-echo-time (ZTE). The 68Ge-transmission data from a previous stand-alone PET scan was used as reference method. Parametric relative delivery ($ R_{1} $) images and binding potential ($ BP_{ND} $) maps were generated using cerebellar grey matter as reference region. Evaluation was based on bias in MRAC maps, accuracy and precision of [11C]PE2I $ BP_{ND} $ and $ R_{1} $ estimates, and [11C]PE2I time-activity curves. $ BP_{ND} $ was examined for striatal regions and $ R_{1} $ in clusters of regions across the brain. Results For $ BP_{ND} $, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest accuracy (bias < 2%) in striatal regions. Atlas-MRAC exhibited a significant bias in caudate nucleus (− 12%) while MaxProb-MRAC revealed a substantial, non-significant bias in the putamen (9%). $ R_{1} $ estimates had a marginal bias for all MRAC methods (− 1.0–3.2%). MaxProb-MRAC showed the largest intersubject variability for both $ R_{1} $ and $ BP_{ND} $. Standardized uptake values (SUV) of striatal regions displayed the strongest average bias for ZTE-MRAC (~ 10%), although constant over time and with the smallest intersubject variability. Atlas-MRAC had highest variation in bias over time (+10 to − 10%), followed by MaxProb-MRAC (+5 to − 5%), but MaxProb showed the lowest mean bias. For the cerebellum, MaxProb-MRAC showed the highest variability while bias was constant over time for Atlas- and ZTE-MRAC. Conclusions Both Maxprob- and ZTE-MRAC performed better than Atlas-MRAC when using a 68Ge transmission scan as reference method. Overall, ZTE-MRAC showed the highest precision and accuracy in outcome parameters of dynamic [11C]PE2I PET analysis with use of kinetic modelling.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">MRAC</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">ZTE</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Atlas</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">MaxProb</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dopamine transporter</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Binding potential</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">rCBF</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Appel, Lieuwe</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Merida, Inés</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Heckemann, Rolf A.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Costes, Nicolas</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Engström, Mathias</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Papadimitriou, Stergios</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nyholm, Dag</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahlström, Håkan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hammers, Alexander</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lubberink, Mark</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">EJNMMI Physics</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin : SpringerOpen, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">7(2020), 1 vom: 28. Dez.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)785697993</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2768912-8</subfield><subfield code="x">2197-7364</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:7</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2020</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:28</subfield><subfield code="g">month:12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40658-020-00347-2</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">7</subfield><subfield code="j">2020</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">28</subfield><subfield code="c">12</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3999777

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Accuracy and precision of zero-echo-time, single- and multi-atlas attenuation correction for dynamic [11C]PE2I PET-MR brain imaging

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?