Literature DB >> 10659741

Signal-to-noise ratio and spatial resolution in x-ray electronic imagers: is the MTF a relevant parameter?

J P Moy1.   

Abstract

In most imaging detectors, the modulation transfer function (MTF) is regarded as a good parameter to describe spatial resolution. This is undoubtedly valid for visual observation. However, the detectability of a detail is essentially a matter of signal-to-noise ratio, which is not accounted for by the MTF. In x-ray imaging, signal-to-noise ratio in the image is generally limited by incident photons statistics, often larger than readout noises. Therefore, the MTF of the detector applies to both signal and noise, and does not impair the image content. Contrast can easily be restored by image processing without altering the signal-to-noise ratio. However, a number of effects may alter very differently noise and signal: (i) If the MTF significantly extends beyond half the sampling frequency, the aliasing introduced by spatial sampling can severely enhance the noise and cancel the benefit of the good signal transfer. This is illustrated by synthetic images which simulate the response of imagers with different MTFs to the same test pattern in the presence of quantum noise. (ii) Parallax and blurring by the x-ray spot size or motion are shown to degrade the transfer properties of signal, but do not affect the quantum noise; they must be treated separately. Contrary to the x-ray converter MTF, parallax directly impacts the detective quantum efficiency (DQE). Finally, it is shown that only the detective quantum efficiency can reliably describe the spatial resolution of an x-ray imaging detector in the presence of noise, parallax and blurring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10659741     DOI: 10.1118/1.598859

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography.

Authors:  Patrik Sund; Magnus Båth; Susanne Kheddache; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-10-16       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Dose reduction in skeletal and chest radiography using a large-area flat-panel detector based on amorphous silicon and thallium-doped cesium iodide: technical background, basic image quality parameters, and review of the literature.

Authors:  Markus Völk; Okka W Hamer; Stefan Feuerbach; Michael Strotzer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-02-17       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Digital detectors for mammography: the technical challenges.

Authors:  A Noel; F Thibault
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-10-08       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Application of QC_DR software for acceptance testing and routine quality control of direct digital radiography systems: initial experiences using the Italian Association of Physicist in Medicine quality control protocol.

Authors:  Andrea Nitrosi; Marco Bertolini; Giovanni Borasi; Andrea Botti; Adriana Barani; Stefano Rivetti; Luisa Pierotti
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2008-09-03       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Small-angle solution scattering using the mixed-mode pixel array detector.

Authors:  Lucas J Koerner; Richard E Gillilan; Katherine S Green; Suntao Wang; Sol M Gruner
Journal:  J Synchrotron Radiat       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 2.616

Review 6.  Management of pediatric radiation dose using GE fluoroscopic equipment.

Authors:  Barry Belanger; John Boudry
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2006-09

7.  Model-based iterative reconstruction for flat-panel cone-beam CT with focal spot blur, detector blur, and correlated noise.

Authors:  Steven Tilley; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; J Webster Stayman
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 3.609

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.