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.
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.
Authors: Patrick Mc Laughlin; Siobhan O Neill; Noel Fanning; Anne Marie Mc Garrigle; Owen J O Connor; Gerry Wyse; Michael M Maher Journal: Emerg Radiol Date: 2011-12-16
Authors: G Compagnone; M Casadio Baleni; E Di Nicola; M Valentino; M Benati; L F Calzolaio; N Oberhofer; E Fabbri; S Domenichelli; L Barozzi Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-10-22 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Ricarda Rühl; Magdalena M Wozniak; Michael Werk; François Laurent; Georg Mager; Michel Montaudon; Andreas Pattermann; Antoine Scherrer; Jean-Pierre Tasu; Maciej Pech; Jens Ricke Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-04-19 Impact factor: 5.315