| Title |
Motion correction in simultaneous PET/MR brain imaging using sparsely sampled MR navigators: a clinically feasible tool
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EJNMMI Physics, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40658-015-0118-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sune H Keller, Casper Hansen, Christian Hansen, Flemming L Andersen, Claes Ladefoged, Claus Svarer, Andreas Kjær, Liselotte Højgaard, Ian Law, Otto M Henriksen, Adam E Hansen |
| Abstract |
We present a study performing motion correction (MC) of PET using MR navigators sampled between other protocolled MR sequences during simultaneous PET/MR brain scanning with the purpose of evaluating its clinical feasibility and the potential improvement of image quality. Twenty-nine human subjects had a 30-min [(11)C]-PiB PET scan with simultaneous MR including 3D navigators sampled at six time points, which were used to correct the PET image for rigid head motion. Five subjects with motion greater than 4 mm were reconstructed into six frames (one for each navigator) which were averaged to one image after MC. The average maximum motion magnitude observed was 3.9 ± 2.4 mm (1 to 11 mm). Visual evaluation by a nuclear medicine physician of the five subjects' motion corrected rated three of the five images blurred before motion correction, while no images were rated blurred after. The image quality was scored on a scale of 1-5, 5 being best. The score changed from an average of 3.4 before motion correction to 4.0 after. There was no correlation between maximum motion magnitude and rating. Quantitative SUVr scoring did not change markedly with motion correction. Sparsely sampled navigators can be used for characterization and correction of head motion. A slight, overall decrease in blurring and an increase in image quality with MC was found, but without impact on clinical interpretation. In future studies with noteworthy motion artifacts, our method is an important and simple-to-use tool to have available for motion correction. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 21% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 7 | 18% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 13% |
| Engineering | 4 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 9 | 23% |
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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,349,419
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from EJNMMI Physics
#76
of 181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,668
of 262,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EJNMMI Physics
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 181 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 262,385 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.