Table 5 Comparison of LDM to VSV convolution absorbed dose calculation methods through Dmean,D50% and D2% for patients #1 and #2 and different VOIs. Reconstructions were performed using i3s10-2mm
From: Yttrium-90 quantitative phantom study using digital photon counting PET
Patient, VOI | VSV convolution | LDM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | \(\overline {D}^{VSV}_{pet}\) | \(D^{VSV}_{pet,50\%}\) | \(D^{VSV}_{pet,2\%}\) | \(\overline {D}^{LDM}_{pet}\) | \(D^{LDM}_{pet,50\%}\) | \(D^{LDM}_{pet,2\%}\) |
#1, WLV | 38.1 | 1.3 | 242.7 | 38.5 | 0.9 | 263.4 |
#1, PLV | 131.0 | 112.2 | 365.7 | 133.8 | 111.2 | 401.4 |
#1, TV | 126.4 | 109.8 | 417.1 | 127.8 | 104.5 | 459.5 |
#1, PNLV | 113.9 | 101.2 | 270.7 | 116.9 | 101.3 | 305.7 |
#2, WLV | 25.1 | 5.4 | 157.8 | 25.5 | 3.6 | 178.1 |
#2, PLV | 61.0 | 45.4 | 197.7 | 62.6 | 43.7 | 231.9 |
#2, TV | 49.5 | 33.4 | 183.8 | 50.4 | 30.0 | 215.8 |
#2, PNLV | 48.5 | 30.0 | 214.1 | 51.8 | 30.6 | 247.9 |