Ahmadi A, Klein R, Gao D, Mielniczuk L, Zelt J, Boczar K
Mol Imaging Biol. 2025; .
PMID: 39939405
DOI: 10.1007/s11307-025-01987-5.
deKemp R
J Nucl Cardiol. 2023; 30(4):1297-1299.
PMID: 37405673
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-023-03324-1.
Kamphuis M, Kuipers H, Verschoor J, van Hespen J, Greuter M, Slart R
EJNMMI Phys. 2022; 9(1):31.
PMID: 35467161
PMC: 9038974.
DOI: 10.1186/s40658-022-00458-y.
Poitrasson-Riviere A, Moody J, Renaud J, Hagio T, Arida-Moody L, Murthy V
J Nucl Cardiol. 2021; 29(5):2612-2623.
PMID: 34448094
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-021-02775-8.
Wang J, Zelt J, Kaps N, Lavallee A, Renaud J, Rotstein B
J Nucl Cardiol. 2021; 29(2):413-425.
PMID: 34341953
PMC: 8807773.
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-021-02732-5.
The Evaluation of Left Ventricle Ischemic Extent in Patients with Significantly Suspicious Cardiovascular Disease by Tc-Sestamibi Dynamic SPECT/CT and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: A Head-to-Head Comparison.
Chan H, Chang C, Hu C, Wang W, Peng N, Tyan Y
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(6).
PMID: 34208558
PMC: 8234843.
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11061101.
EANM procedural guidelines for PET/CT quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging.
Sciagra R, Lubberink M, Hyafil F, Saraste A, Slart R, Agostini D
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020; 48(4):1040-1069.
PMID: 33135093
PMC: 7603916.
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05046-9.
Comparison of myocardial blood flow and flow reserve with dobutamine and dipyridamole stress using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography.
Pelletier-Galarneau M, Ferro P, Patterson S, Ruddy T, Beanlands R, deKemp R
J Nucl Cardiol. 2020; 28(1):34-45.
PMID: 32449001
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-020-02186-1.
Non-invasive determination of blood input function to compute rate of myocardial glucose uptake from dynamic FDG PET images of rat heart in vivo: comparative study between the inferior vena cava and the left ventricular blood pool with spill over....
Huang Q, Massey J, Minczuk K, Li J, Kundu B
Phys Med Biol. 2019; 64(16):165010.
PMID: 31307015
PMC: 7590261.
DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab3238.
Absolute myocardial blood flows derived by dynamic CZT scan vs invasive fractional flow reserve: Correlation and accuracy.
Zavadovsky K, Mochula A, Boshchenko A, Vrublevsky A, Baev A, Krylov A
J Nucl Cardiol. 2019; 28(1):249-259.
PMID: 30847856
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-019-01678-z.
Reproducible quantification of cardiac sympathetic innervation using graphical modeling of carbon-11-meta-hydroxyephedrine kinetics with dynamic PET-CT imaging.
Wang T, Wu K, Miner R, Renaud J, Beanlands R, deKemp R
EJNMMI Res. 2018; 8(1):63.
PMID: 30030665
PMC: 6054601.
DOI: 10.1186/s13550-018-0421-5.
First validation of myocardial flow reserve assessed by dynamic Tc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT camera: head to head comparison with O-water PET and fractional flow reserve in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. The WATERDAY study.
Agostini D, Roule V, Nganoa C, Roth N, Baavour R, Parienti J
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018; 45(7):1079-1090.
PMID: 29497801
PMC: 5953996.
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-018-3958-7.
Optimally Repeatable Kinetic Model Variant for Myocardial Blood Flow Measurements with Rb PET.
Ocneanu A, deKemp R, Renaud J, Adler A, Beanlands R, Klein R
Comput Math Methods Med. 2017; 2017:6810626.
PMID: 28293274
PMC: 5331165.
DOI: 10.1155/2017/6810626.
SPECT myocardial blood flow quantitation toward clinical use: a comparative study with N-Ammonia PET myocardial blood flow quantitation.
Hsu B, Hu L, Yang B, Chen L, Chen Y, Ting C
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016; 44(1):117-128.
PMID: 27585576
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-016-3491-5.
Clinical use of quantitative cardiac perfusion PET: rationale, modalities and possible indications. Position paper of the Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM).
Sciagra R, Passeri A, Bucerius J, Verberne H, Slart R, Lindner O
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016; 43(8):1530-45.
PMID: 26846913
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-016-3317-5.
Precision and accuracy of clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET: A technical perspective.
Moody J, Lee B, Corbett J, Ficaro E, Murthy V
J Nucl Cardiol. 2015; 22(5):935-51.
PMID: 25868451
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0100-0.
Whole-body PET/CT evaluation of tumor perfusion using generator-based 62Cu-ethylglyoxal bis(thiosemicarbazonato)copper(II): validation by direct comparison to 15O-water in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
Fletcher J, Logan T, Eitel J, Mathias C, Ng Y, Lacy J
J Nucl Med. 2014; 56(1):56-62.
PMID: 25525184
PMC: 11384506.
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.114.148106.
Evaluation of image reconstruction algorithms encompassing Time-Of-Flight and Point Spread Function modelling for quantitative cardiac PET: phantom studies.
Presotto L, Gianolli L, Gilardi M, Bettinardi V
J Nucl Cardiol. 2014; 22(2):351-63.
PMID: 25367452
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-014-0023-1.
Quantitative cardiac positron emission tomography: the time is coming!.
Sciagra R
Scientifica (Cairo). 2013; 2012:948653.
PMID: 24278760
PMC: 3820449.
DOI: 10.6064/2012/948653.
Characterizing the normal range of myocardial blood flow with ⁸²rubidium and ¹³N-ammonia PET imaging.
Renaud J, DaSilva J, Beanlands R, deKemp R
J Nucl Cardiol. 2013; 20(4):578-91.
PMID: 23657833
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-013-9721-3.