Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&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: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
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
Purpose: The N-Isopropyl-p-[123I] Iodoamphetamine (I-IMP) SPECT imaging reduces the image quality and quantitative accuracy due to scatter and septal penetration occurred by radioactive uptake from outside of the field of view such as the lungs. We evaluated the influence of scatter and septal penetration using phantom-simulated radioactivity from outside of the field of view, and subsequently compared the effect of scatter and septal penetration corrections between the simulation-based effective scatter source estimation (ESSE) method and the multi-window method (ellipse approximation method).
Methods: We used the phantom filled with 10 and 25 kBq/mL for the brain and lung parts corresponding to radioactive concentration in the clinical study. The SPECT images were acquired with and without lung phantom using low-energy high-resolution (LEHR) and cardiac high-resolution (CHR) collimators. We quantitatively evaluated a brain phantom by count analysis and coefficient of variation as reference data without lung phantom simulated the radioactivity from outside of the field of view, and compared between two scatter corrections by each collimator.
Results: The brain count in cerebral base with the ESSE method using LEHR collimator was higher than that of the ellipse approximation method. The whole brain count with the ellipse approximation method using CHR collimator shows 28.8% lower than the ESSE method, so that it suggests that the ellipse approximation method for LEHR collimator and the ESSE method for CHR collimator was close to reference counts. The coefficient of variation of the ESSE method was lower than that of the ellipse approximation method for both two collimators.
Conclusions: It was possible to correct the scatter and penetration from outside the field of view with high accuracy, by using the ellipse approximation method with LEHR collimator and the ESSE method with CHR collimator.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.2017_JSRT_73.10.1028 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!