MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain
Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain
Journal Article

Validation of a combined image derived input function and venous sampling approach for the quantification of 18FGE-179 PET binding in the brain

2021
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Blood-based kinetic analysis of PET data relies on an accurate estimate of the arterial plasma input function (PIF). An alternative to invasive measurements from arterial sampling is an image-derived input function (IDIF). However, an IDIF provides the whole blood radioactivity concentration, rather than the required free tracer radioactivity concentration in plasma. To estimate the tracer PIF, we corrected an IDIF from the carotid artery with estimates of plasma parent fraction (PF) and plasma-to-whole blood (PWB) ratio obtained from five venous samples. We compared the combined IDIF+venous approach to gold standard data from arterial sampling in 10 healthy volunteers undergoing [18F]GE-179 brain PET imaging of the NMDA receptor. Arterial and venous PF and PWB ratio estimates determined from 7 patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) were also compared to assess the potential effect of medication. There was high agreement between areas under the curves of the estimates of PF (r = 0.99, p<0.001), PWB ratio (r = 0.93, p<0.001), and the PIF (r = 0.92, p<0.001) as well as total distribution volume (VT) in 11 regions across the brain (r = 0.95, p<0.001). IDIF+venous VT had a mean bias of −1.7% and a comparable regional coefficient of variation (arterial: 21.3 ± 2.5%, IDIF+venous: 21.5 ± 2.0%). Simplification of the IDIF+venous method to use only one venous sample provided less accurate VT estimates (mean bias 9.9%; r = 0.71, p<0.001). A version of the method that avoids the need for blood sampling by combining the IDIF with population-based PF and PWB ratio estimates systematically underestimated VT (mean bias −20.9%), and produced VT estimates with a poor correlation to those obtained using arterial data (r = 0.45, p<0.001). Arterial and venous blood data from 7 TBI patients showed high correlations for PF (r = 0.92, p = 0.003) and PWB ratio (r = 0.93, p = 0.003). In conclusion, the IDIF+venous method with five venous samples provides a viable alternative to arterial sampling for quantification of [18F]GE-179 VT.