Why the study?
Does motion correction improve PET quantitation and image quality in 18F-fluoride PET/CT and PET/MRI of the aortic valve in patients with aortic stenosis?
Does motion correction improve PET quantitation and image quality in 18F-fluoride PET/CT and PET/MRI of the aortic valve in patients with aortic stenosis?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Motion correction of hybrid 18F-fluoride PET markedly improves signal-to-noise ratio and image quality in patients with aortic stenosis.
We investigated whether motion correction of gated ¹⁸F-fluoride PET/CT and PET/MRI of the aortic valve could improve PET quantitation and image quality. Methods: A diffeomorphic, mass-preserving, anatomy-guided registration algorithm was used to align the PET images from 4 cardiac gates, preserving all counts, and apply them to the PET/MRI and PET/CT data of 6 patients with aortic stenosis. Measured signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and target-to-background ratios (TBRs) were compared with the standard method of using only the diastolic gate. Results: High-intensity aortic valve ¹⁸F-fluoride uptake was observed in all patients. After motion correction, SNR and TBR increased compared with the median diastolic gate (SNR, 51.61 vs. 21.0; TBR, 2.85 vs. 2.22) and the median summed data (SNR, 51.61 vs. 34.10; TBR, 2.85 vs. 1.95) (P = 0.028 for all). Furthermore, noise decreased from 0.105 (median, diastolic) to 0.042 (median, motion-corrected) (P = 0.028). Conclusion: Motion correction of hybrid ¹⁸F-fluoride PET markedly improves SNR, resulting in improved image quality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Doris et al. (2017) studied Aortic stenosis (n=6). Motion correction of gated 18F-fluoride PET/CT and PET/MRI vs. Standard method using only the diastolic gate or median summed data was evaluated on Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and target-to-background ratio (TBR) (p=0.028).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: