2002•Investigative RadiologyRequires access

Flat Panel Digital Radiography Compared With Storage Phosphor Computed Radiography

Frank Fischbach, Jens Ricke, Torsten Freund, Michael Werk, Birgit Spors, Clemens Baumann, Maciej Pech, Roland Felix

Open publisher page 42 citations

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: To assess and quantify the dose reduction by use of a CsI-flat panel digital radiography (DR)-system compared with digital computed radiography (CR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A TCDD-test using the CDRAD-phantom was performed at mAs-values of 5, 4, 2.5, 2, 1, and 0.5 mAs for both digital systems. Entrance surface doses were recorded for all images. Images were presented to four independent observers. For quantitative comparison the image quality figure (IQF) was calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using the Pearson correlation and the Wilcoxon test. A ROC analysis was performed using the TRG-phantom. Settings of 4, 2.5, 2 mAs for both systems were used. In addition, 1 and 0.5 mAs were used for the DR system only. Statistical significance was evaluated using Student test. RESULTS: The DR system provided equivalent results compared with CR with respect to high frequency information and superior results with respect to low contrast details. Compared with computed radiography, the flat panel detector demonstrated significantly lower IQFs, ensuring a better image quality with respect to contrast and detail detectability. IQFs for DR and CR were equal at a surface dose reduction of 87% for DR. ROC analysis revealed significantly higher values under the curve for DR up to a surface dose reduction of 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Image quality of DR proved to be far superior to CR in particular for low contrast details. The image quality of CR is similar to that of DR only at high dose levels.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: To assess and quantify the dose reduction by use of a CsI-flat panel digital radiography (DR)-system compared with digital computed radiography (CR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A TCDD-test using the CDRAD-phantom was performed at mAs-values of 5, 4, 2.5, 2, 1, and 0.5 mAs for both digital systems. Entrance surface doses were recorded for all images. Images were presented to four independent observers. For quantitative comparison the image quality figure (IQF) was calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using the Pearson correlation and the Wilcoxon test. A ROC analysis was performed using the TRG-phantom. Settings of 4, 2.5, 2 mAs for both systems were used. In addition, 1 and 0.5 mAs were used for the DR system only. Statistical significance was evaluated using Student test. RESULTS: The DR system provided equivalent results compared with CR with respect to high frequency information and superior results with respect to low contrast details. Compared with computed radiography, the flat panel detector demonstrated significantly lower IQFs, ensuring a better image quality with respect to contrast and detail detectability. IQFs for DR and CR were equal at a surface dose reduction of 87% for DR. ROC analysis revealed significantly higher values under the curve for DR up to a surface dose reduction of 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Image quality of DR proved to be far superior to CR in particular for low contrast details. The image quality of CR is similar to that of DR only at high dose levels.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 42 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: To assess and quantify the dose reduction by use of a CsI-flat panel digital radiography (DR)-system compared with digital computed radiography (CR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A TCDD-test using the CDRAD-phantom was performed at mAs-values of 5, 4, 2.5, 2, 1, and 0.5 mAs for both digital systems. Entrance surface doses were recorded for all images. Images were presented to four independent observers. For quantitative comparison the image quality figure (IQF) was calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using the Pearson correlation and the Wilcoxon test. A ROC analysis was performed using the TRG-phantom. Settings of 4, 2.5, 2 mAs for both systems were used. In addition, 1 and 0.5 mAs were used for the DR system only. Statistical significance was evaluated using Student test. RESULTS: The DR system provided equivalent results compared with CR with respect to high frequency information and superior results with respect to low contrast details. Compared with computed radiography, the flat panel detector demonstrated significantly lower IQFs, ensuring a better image quality with respect to contrast and detail detectability. IQFs for DR and CR were equal at a surface dose reduction of 87% for DR. ROC analysis revealed significantly higher values under the curve for DR up to a surface dose reduction of 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Image quality of DR proved to be far superior to CR in particular for low contrast details. The image quality of CR is similar to that of DR only at high dose levels.

Key concepts: Computed radiography, Imaging phantom, Radiography, Digital radiography, Flat panel detector, Image quality, Nuclear medicine, Wilcoxon signed-rank test

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Flat Panel Digital Radiography Compared With Storage Phosphor Computed Radiography — Research Paper | ScholarLens