↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction versus OS-EM for characterization of small pulmonary nodules in oncologic PET/CT

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Nuclear Medicine, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Comparison of Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction versus OS-EM for characterization of small pulmonary nodules in oncologic PET/CT
Published in
Annals of Nuclear Medicine, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12149-017-1192-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brandon A. Howard, Rustain Morgan, Matthew P. Thorpe, Timothy G. Turkington, Jorge Oldan, Olga G. James, Salvador Borges-Neto

Abstract

To determine whether the recently introduced Bayesian penalized likelihood PET reconstruction (Q.Clear) increases the visual conspicuity and SUVmax of small pulmonary nodules near the PET resolution limit, relative to ordered subset expectation maximization (OS-EM). In this institutional review board-approved and HIPAA-compliant study, 29 FDG PET/CT scans performed on a five-ring GE Discovery IQ were retrospectively selected for pulmonary nodules described in the radiologist's report as "too small to characterize", or small lung nodules in patients at high risk for lung cancer. Thirty-two pulmonary nodules were assessed, with mean CT diameter of 8 mm (range 2-18). PET images were reconstructed with OS-EM and Q.Clear with noise penalty strength β values of 150, 250, and 350. Lesion visual conspicuity was scored by three readers on a 3-point scale, and lesion SUVmax and background liver and blood pool SUVmean and SUVstdev were recorded. Comparison was made by linear mixed model with modified Bonferroni post hoc testing; significance cutoff was p < 0.05. Q.Clear improved lesion visual conspicuity compared to OS-EM at β = 150 (p < 0.01), but not 250 or 350. Lesion SUVmax was increased compared to OS-EM at β = 150 and 250 (p < 0.01), but not 350. In a cohort of small pulmonary nodules with size near an 8 mm PET full-width half maximum, Q.Clear significantly increased lesion visual conspicuity and SUVmax compared to our standard non- time-of-flight OS-EM reconstruction, but only with low noise penalization. Q.Clear with β = 150 may be advantageous when evaluation of small pulmonary nodules is of primary concern.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Other 8 14%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 34%
Physics and Astronomy 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Engineering 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,559,907
of 22,986,950 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Nuclear Medicine
#397
of 635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,208
of 312,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Nuclear Medicine
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,986,950 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 635 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.