Literature DB >> 19746814

Effective DQE (eDQE) and speed of digital radiographic systems: an experimental methodology.

Ehsan Samei1, Nicole T Ranger, Alistair MacKenzie, Ian D Honey, James T Dobbins, Carl E Ravin.   

Abstract

Prior studies on performance evaluation of digital radiographic systems have primarily focused on the assessment of the detector performance alone. However, the clinical performance of such systems is also substantially impacted by magnification, focal spot blur, the presence of scattered radiation, and the presence of an antiscatter grid. The purpose of this study is to evaluate an experimental methodology to assess the performance of a digital radiographic system, including those attributes, and to propose a new metric, effective detective quantum efficiency (eDQE), a candidate for defining the efficiency or speed of digital radiographic imaging systems. The study employed a geometric phantom simulating the attenuation and scatter properties of the adult human thorax and a representative indirect flat-panel-based clinical digital radiographic imaging system. The noise power spectrum (NPS) was derived from images of the phantom acquired at three exposure levels spanning the operating range of the clinical system. The modulation transfer function (MTF) was measured using an edge device positioned at the surface of the phantom, facing the x-ray source. Scatter measurements were made using a beam stop technique. The eDQE was then computed from these measurements, along with measures of phantom attenuation and x-ray flux. The MTF results showed notable impact from the focal spot blur, while the NPS depicted a large component of structured noise resulting from use of an antiscatter grid. The eDQE was found to be an order of magnitude lower than the conventional DQE. At 120 kVp, eDQE(0) was in the 8%-9% range, fivefold lower than DQE(0) at the same technique. The eDQE method yielded reproducible estimates of the system performance in a clinically relevant context by quantifying the inherent speed of the system, that is, the actual signal to noise ratio that would be measured under clinical operating conditions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19746814      PMCID: PMC2728566          DOI: 10.1118/1.3171690

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


  24 in total

1.  An experimental comparison of detector performance for computed radiography systems.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Michael J Flynn
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Image quality in two phosphor-based flat panel digital radiographic detectors.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Fundamental imaging characteristics of a slot-scan digital chest radiographic system.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Robert S Saunders; Joseph Y Lo; James T Dobbins; Jonathan L Jesneck; Carey E Floyd; Carl E Ravin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Comparative scatter and dose performance of slot-scan and full-field digital chest radiography systems.

Authors:  Ehsan Samei; Joseph Y Lo; Terry T Yoshizumi; Jonathan L Jesneck; James T Dobbins; Carey E Floyd; H Page McAdams; Carl E Ravin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-04-21       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Measurement of the detective quantum efficiency (DQE) of digital X-ray detectors according to the novel standard IEC 62220-1.

Authors:  Hartmut Illers; Egbert Buhr; Christoph Hoeschen
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

6.  A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems.

Authors:  P Monnin; D Gutierrez; S Bulling; D Guntern; F R Verdun
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Study of the Generalized MTF and DQE for a New Microangiographic System.

Authors:  Iacovos S Kyprianou; Stephen Rudin; Daniel R Bednarek; Kenneth R Hoffmann
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2004-05-06

8.  A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device.

Authors:  E Samei; M J Flynn; D A Reimann
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 9.  X-ray detectors for digital radiography.

Authors:  M J Yaffe; J A Rowlands
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Beam quality independent attenuation phantom for estimating patient exposure from x-ray automatic exposure controlled chest examinations.

Authors:  B J Conway; P F Butler; J E Duff; T R Fewell; R E Gross; R J Jennings; G H Koustenis; J L McCrohan; F G Rueter; C K Showalter
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1984 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  5 in total

1.  Effective DQE (eDQE) and dose to optimize radiographic technical parameters: a survey of pediatric chest X-ray examinations in Korea.

Authors:  Hye-Suk Park; Ye-Seul Kim; Ok-Seob Park; Sang-Tae Kim; Chang-Woo Jeon; Hee-Joung Kim
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Investigation of noise sources for digital radiography systems.

Authors:  Lutfi Ergun; Turan Olgar
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-10-01

3.  Investigation of optimum anti-scatter grid selection for digital radiography: physical imaging properties and detectability of low-contrast signals.

Authors:  Nobukazu Tanaka; Kentaro Naka; Aya Saito; Junji Morishita; Fukai Toyofuku; Masafumi Ohki; Yoshiharu Higashida
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2012-08-08

4.  Correlation of the clinical and physical image quality in chest radiography for average adults with a computed radiography imaging system.

Authors:  C S Moore; T J Wood; A W Beavis; J R Saunderson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Generalized two-dimensional (2D) linear system analysis metrics (GMTF, GDQE) for digital radiography systems including the effect of focal spot, magnification, scatter, and detector characteristics.

Authors:  Amit Jain; Andrew T Kuhls-Gilcrist; Sandesh K Gupta; Daniel R Bednarek; Stephen Rudin
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2010-03-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.