Literature DB >> 21876093

Establishing cutoff values for a quality assurance test using an ultrasound phantom in screening ultrasound examinations for hepatocellular carcinoma: an initial report of a nationwide survey in Korea.

Joon-Il Choi1, Pyo Nyun Kim, Woo Kyoung Jeong, Hyun Cheol Kim, Dal Mo Yang, Sang Hoon Cha, Jae-Joon Chung.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of ultrasound (US) device testing using a US phantom and to determine cutoff values for phantom quality assurance tests in US examinations for the screening of hepatocellular carcinoma in Korea.
METHODS: Ultrasound phantom images were acquired from the general hospitals in Korea that participated in the National Cancer Screening Program for hepatocellular carcinoma. Ultrasound images of the phantom were acquired with a 3.0- to 5.0-MHz convex transducer and evaluated in terms of the dead zone, vertical and horizontal measurement, axial and lateral resolution, sensitivity, and gray scale/dynamic range. Appropriate cutoff values were determined to guarantee minimal qualifications for the performance of the US scanners.
RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-seven US scanners were tested using the following cutoff values: less than 2 mm for the dead zone, 5% discrepancy in the vertical measurement, 7.5% discrepancy in the horizontal measurement, all 11 identifiable line targets for axial and lateral resolution, more than 14 cm for sensitivity, and more than 4 cylindrical structures for gray scale/dynamic range. With these criteria, 283 US scanners (79.3%) passed the tests. The most common cause of disqualification was the dynamic range/gray scale. No statistical difference was observed in the disqualification rate between 3 groups based on different years of manufacture.
CONCLUSIONS: Through this study, we have defined cutoff values for phantom images acquired with US scanners. These will be used in performing screening US examinations for hepatocellular carcinoma in Korea.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21876093     DOI: 10.7863/jum.2011.30.9.1221

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ultrasound Med        ISSN: 0278-4297            Impact factor:   2.153


  4 in total

1.  Performance Evaluation of Ultrasonic Imaging System (Part I).

Authors:  Ammar A Oglat; Mohammed Ali Dheyab
Journal:  J Med Ultrasound       Date:  2021-05-14

Review 2.  Review of consensus test methods in medical imaging and current practices in photoacoustic image quality assessment.

Authors:  Jorge Palma-Chavez; T Joshua Pfefer; Anant Agrawal; Jesse V Jokerst; William C Vogt
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 3.170

3.  Intra- and interobserver reliability of gray scale/dynamic range evaluation of ultrasonography using a standardized phantom.

Authors:  Song Lee; Joon-Il Choi; Michael Yong Park; Dong Myung Yeo; Jae Young Byun; Seung Eun Jung; Sung Eun Rha; Soon Nam Oh; Young Joon Lee
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2014-02-26

4.  Current status of image-based surveillance in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Dong Hwan Kim; Joon-Il Choi
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2020-07-25
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.