Literature DB >> 16896703

Should 3K zoom function be used for detection of pneumothorax in cesium iodide/amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiographs presented on 1K-matrix soft copies?

Karin A Herrmann1, H M Bonél, A Stäbler, M Voelk, M Strotzer, C J Zech, M F Reiser.   

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to evaluate observer performance in the detection of pneumothorax with cesium iodide and amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography (CsI/a-Si FDR) presented as 1K and 3K soft-copy images. Forty patients with and 40 patients without pneumothorax diagnosed on previous and subsequent digital storage phosphor radiography (SPR, gold standard) had follow-up chest radiographs with CsI/a-Si FDR. Four observers confirmed or excluded the diagnosis of pneumothorax according to a five-point scale first on the 1K soft-copy image and then with help of 3K zoom function (1K monitor). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed for each modality (1K and 3K). The area under the curve (AUC) values for each observer were 0.7815, 0.7779, 0.7946 and 0.7066 with 1K-matrix soft copies and 0.8123, 0.7997, 0.8078 and 0.7522 with 3K zoom. Overall detection of pneumothorax was better with 3K zoom. Differences between the two display methods were not statistically significant in 3 of 4 observers (p-values between 0.13 and 0.44; observer 4: p = 0.02). The detection of pneumothorax with 3K zoom is better than with 1K soft copy but not at a statistically significant level. Differences between both display methods may be subtle. Still, our results indicate that 3K zoom should be employed in clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16896703     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0344-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  18 in total

1.  Detection of pneumothorax: comparison of digital and conventional chest imaging.

Authors:  L L Fajardo; B J Hillman; G D Pond; R F Carmody; J E Johnson; W R Ferrell
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Image quality performance of liquid crystal display systems: influence of display resolution, magnification and window settings on contrast-detail detection.

Authors:  Klaus Bacher; Peter Smeets; An De Hauwere; Tony Voet; Philippe Duyck; Koenraad Verstraete; Hubert Thierens
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2006-01-25       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  Efficacy of digital radiography for the detection of pneumothorax: comparison with conventional chest radiography.

Authors:  E A Elam; K Rehm; B J Hillman; K Maloney; L L Fajardo; K McNeill
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Chest radiography: comparison of high-resolution digital displays with conventional and digital film.

Authors:  G G Cox; L T Cook; J H McMillan; S J Rosenthal; S J Dwyer
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser-printed, and high-resolution workstation images.

Authors:  B S Slasky; D Gur; W F Good; M A Costa-Greco; K M Harris; L A Cooperstein; H E Rockette
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  1K versus 2K monitor: a clinical alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic study of observer performance using pulmonary nodules.

Authors:  B Graf; U Simon; F Eickmeyer; V Fiedler
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Digital radiography of subtle pulmonary abnormalities: an ROC study of the effect of pixel size on observer performance.

Authors:  H MacMahon; C J Vyborny; C E Metz; K Doi; V Sabeti; S L Solomon
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Digital chest radiography: clinical aspects.

Authors:  U Tylén
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Comparison of low contrast detectability between a digital amorphous silicon and a screen-film based imaging system for thoracic radiography.

Authors:  R Aufrichtig
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Digital luminescence radiography using a chest phantom. Comparison between radiographs displayed on monitor and hard-copy.

Authors:  M Kehler; U Albrechtsson; E Arnadóttir; A Ebbesen; P Hochbergs; A Lundin; K Lyttkens; K Kheddache; L G Månsson; J E Angelhed
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 1.990

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.