Literature DB >> 30737566

Optimal beam quality for chest flat panel detector system: realistic phantom study.

Chie Kuwahara1, Takatoshi Aoki2, Nobuhiro Oda3, Jun Kawabata1, Koichiro Sugimoto1, Michiko Kobayashi1, Masami Fujii1, Yukunori Korogi1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate optimal beam quality for chest flat panel detector (FPD) system by semi-quantitatively assessment using a realistic lung phantom.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Chest FPD radiographs were obtained on a realistic lung phantom with simulated lung opacities using various X-ray tube voltage levels (90-140 kV) with/without copper filter. Entrance skin dose was set to maintain identical for all images (0.1 mGy). Three chest radiologists unaware of the exposure settings independently evaluated the image quality of each simulated opacity and normal structure using a 5-point scale (+ 2: clearly superior to the standard; + 1: slightly superior to the standard; 0: equal to the standard; - 1: slightly inferior to the standard; - 2: clearly inferior to the standard). The traditional FPD image obtained at a tube voltage of 120 kV was used as the standard. The scores of image quality were statistically compared using the Wilcoxon rank test with Bonferroni correction.
RESULTS: FPD images using 90-kV shot with copper filter were superior to the traditional 120-kV shot without filter with respect to the visibility of vertebra, pulmonary vessels, and nodules overlapping diaphragm and heart (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference with respect to the visibility of all other simulated lung opacities (lung nodules except for overlying diaphragm/heart and honeycomb opacity) between each tube voltage level with/without copper filter and the traditional 120-kV shot without filter.
CONCLUSION: Image quality of FPD images using 90 kV with copper filtration is superior to that using standard tube voltage when dose is identical. KEY POINTS: • FPD image quality using 90 kV with filter is superior to that using traditional beam. • Ninety-kilovolt shot with copper filter may be suitable for chest FPD image. • Clinical study dealing with chest FPD beam optimization would be warranted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chest radiography; Digital radiography; Dose; Image quality; Physics

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30737566     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-5998-1

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


  16 in total

1.  Chest radiography: optimization of X-ray spectrum for cesium iodide-amorphous silicon flat-panel detector.

Authors:  James T Dobbins; Ehsan Samei; Harrell G Chotas; Richard J Warp; Alan H Baydush; Carey E Floyd; Carl E Ravin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann ICRP       Date:  1991

3.  Transition from screen-film to digital radiography: evolution of patient radiation doses at projection radiography.

Authors:  Eliseo Vaño; José Miguel Fernández; José Ignacio Ten; Carlos Prieto; Luciano González; Ricardo Rodríguez; Hugo de las Heras
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Radiation dose evaluation in tomosynthesis and C-arm cone-beam CT examinations with an anthropomorphic phantom.

Authors:  Shuji Koyama; Takahiko Aoyama; Nobuhiro Oda; Chiyo Yamauchi-Kawaura
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Towards optimization in digital chest radiography using Monte Carlo modelling.

Authors:  Gustaf Ullman; Michael Sandborg; David R Dance; Roger A Hunt; Gudrun Alm Carlsson
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-05-09       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 6.  Advances in digital radiography: physical principles and system overview.

Authors:  Markus Körner; Christof H Weber; Stefan Wirth; Klaus-Jürgen Pfeifer; Maximilian F Reiser; Marcus Treitl
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.333

7.  [Summary of results of the patient exposures in diagnostic radiography in 2011 questionnaire-focus on radiographic conditions-].

Authors:  Yasuki Asada; Syoichi Suzuki; Kenichi Kobayashi; Hideyuki Kato; Takayuki Igarashi; Atsuko Tsukamoto; Hajime Sakamoto
Journal:  Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi       Date:  2012

8.  Chest radiography with a flat-panel detector: image quality with dose reduction after copper filtration.

Authors:  Okka W Hamer; Claude B Sirlin; Michael Strotzer; Ingitha Borisch; Niels Zorger; Stefan Feuerbach; Markus Völk
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-09-28       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Flat-panel-detector chest radiography: effect of tube voltage on image quality.

Authors:  Martin Uffmann; Ulrich Neitzel; Mathias Prokop; Nahla Kabalan; Michael Weber; Christian J Herold; Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Sensitivity and accuracy of volumetry of pulmonary nodules on low-dose 16- and 64-row multi-detector CT: an anthropomorphic phantom study.

Authors:  Xueqian Xie; Yingru Zhao; Roland A Snijder; Peter M A van Ooijen; Pim A de Jong; Matthijs Oudkerk; Geertruida H de Bock; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Marcel J W Greuter
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-07-14       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  3 in total

1.  Dose reduction and image quality improvement of chest radiography by using bone-suppression technique and low tube voltage: a phantom study.

Authors:  Satoshi Takagi; Tatsuya Yaegashi; Masayori Ishikawa
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  An evaluation of the effect of tube potential on clinical image quality using direct digital detectors for pelvis and lumbar spine radiographs.

Authors:  Nicole E Peacock; Adam L Steward; Peter J Riley
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2020-06-03

3.  Influence of the use of various imaging units and projections on the radiation dose received by children during chest digital radiography.

Authors:  Hongrong Xu; Kaiping Huang; Bo Liu; Jinhua Cai; Huan Zheng; Helin Zheng; Qiurui Yang; Changhong Yao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.