Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: A new deconvolution algorithm, the Bayesian estimation algorithm, was reported to improve the precision of parametric maps created using perfusion computed tomography. However, it remains unclear whether quantitative values generated by this method are more accurate than those generated using optimized deconvolution algorithms of other software packages. Hence, we compared the accuracy of the Bayesian and deconvolution algorithms by using a digital phantom.
Methods: The digital phantom data, in which concentration-time curves reflecting various known values for cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV), mean transit time (MTT), and tracer delays were embedded, were analyzed using the Bayesian estimation algorithm as well as delay-insensitive singular value decomposition (SVD) algorithms of two software packages that were the best benchmarks in a previous cross-validation study. Correlation and agreement of quantitative values of these algorithms with true values were examined.
Results: CBF, CBV, and MTT values estimated by all the algorithms showed strong correlations with the true values (r = 0.91-0.92, 0.97-0.99, and 0.91-0.96, respectively). In addition, the values generated by the Bayesian estimation algorithm for all of these parameters showed good agreement with the true values [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.90, 0.99, and 0.96, respectively], while MTT values from the SVD algorithms were suboptimal (ICC = 0.81-0.82).
Conclusions: Quantitative analysis using a digital phantom revealed that the Bayesian estimation algorithm yielded CBF, CBV, and MTT maps strongly correlated with the true values and MTT maps with better agreement than those produced by delay-insensitive SVD algorithms.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-013-1237-7 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!