Table 2 Resulting pharmacokinetic parameters calculated by the different models and the reference test data set. Model evaluation was performed by the ROI-based approach, i.e., selecting the AIF as ROI in the upper row of the test data set and the tissue ROI in the lower row (see [31] for details on the test data set). For our test data set we do not expect physiological reasonable values but identical results to verify the technical correct implementation of the algorithms in UMMPerfusion
Parameter | Reference | UMMPerfusion |
|---|---|---|
1 CP | ||
Plasma Flow | 0,148 | 0,148 |
Plasma MTT | 0,012 | 0,012 |
Plasma Volume | 0,033 | 0,033 |
2 CXM | ||
Plasma Flow | 0,056 | 0,056 |
Plasma MTT | 0,092 | 0,092 |
Plasma Volume | 0,133 | 0,133 |
Interstitial MTT | 73684,672 | 73684,672 |
Interstitial Volume | 0,129 | 0,129 |
Extraction Fraction | 0,149 | 0,149 |
Perm.-surf. Area product | 0,088 | 0,088 |
2 CFM | ||
Plasma Flow | 0,264 | 0,076 |
Plasma MTT | 0,03 | 0,03 |
Plasma Volume | 0,076 | 0,076 |
Tubular MTT | 767313,375 | 767313,375 |
Tubular Flow | 0,166 | 0,166 |
Extraction Fraction | 0,001 | 0,001 |
2 CUM | ||
Plasma Flow | 0,032 | 0,032 |
Plasma MTT | 0,011 | 0,011 |
Plasma Volume | 0,033 | 0,033 |
Perm.-surf. Area product | 0 | 0 |
Extraction Fraction | 0 | 0 |
ETM | ||
Plasma Volume | 0,095 | 0,095 |
Ktrans | 0,122 | 0,122 |
Interstitial MTT | 0,023 | 0,023 |
Interstitial Volume | 0,007 | 0,007 |