Literature DB >> 33833315

Image quality is resilient against tube voltage variations in post-mortem skeletal radiography with a digital flat-panel detector.

S Notohamiprodjo1, K M Roeper2, K M Treitl3, B Hoberg4, F Wanninger5, L Verstreepen6, F G Mueck7, D Maxien8, F Fischer9, O Peschel9, S Wirth10.   

Abstract

In recent phantom studies low-contrast detectability was shown to be independent from variations in tube voltage in digital radiography (DR) systems. To investigate the transferability to a clinical setting, the lower extremities of human cadavers were exposed at constant detector doses with different tube voltages in a certain range, as proposed in the phantom studies. Three radiologists independently graded different aspects of image quality (IQ) in a comparative analysis. The grades show no correlation between IQ and kV, which means that the readers were not able to recognize a significant IQ difference at different kV. Signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios showed no significant differences in IQ despite the kV-setting variations. These findings were observed from a limited kV range setting. Higher kV-settings resulted in lowest patient exposure at constant IQ. These results confirm the potential of DR-systems to contribute to standardization of examination protocols comparable to computed tomography. This may prevent the trend to overexpose. Further investigations in other body regions and other DR-systems are encouraged to determine transferability.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33833315     DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-87294-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


  17 in total

1.  Effective dose delivered by conventional radiology to Aosta Valley population between 2002 and 2009.

Authors:  F Zenone; S Aimonetto; P Catuzzo; A Peruzzo Cornetto; P Marchisio; M Natrella; A M Rosanò; T Meloni; M Pasquino; S Tofani
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Optimisation of image plate radiography with respect to tube voltage.

Authors:  Anders Tingberg; David Sjöström
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

Review 3.  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

Review 4.  Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose.

Authors:  Martin Uffmann; Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2009-07-22       Impact factor: 3.528

5.  Radiographic skeletal survey for non-accidental injury: systematic review and development of a national New Zealand protocol.

Authors:  Karin L Phillips; Sonja T Bastin; David Davies-Payne; Diana Browne; Helen L Bird; Susan Craw; David Duncan; Philippa Depree; Alina Leigh; Andrew McLaughlin; Russell Metcalfe; Jean Murdoch; Kirsten Pearce; David Perry; Iona Thomas; Glen D Thomson; Sally Vogel; Francessa Wilson; Rita L Teele
Journal:  J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 1.735

6.  Patient exposure in medical X-ray imaging in Europe.

Authors:  Dieter F Regulla; Heinrich Eder
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

7.  Effectiveness of adjusting radiographic technique parameters on image quality in direct digital radiography: a systematic review protocol.

Authors:  Caitlin Steffensen; Gregory Trypis; Gordon T W Mander; Zachary Munn
Journal:  JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep       Date:  2019-10

Review 8.  Patient-based radiographic exposure factor selection: a systematic review.

Authors:  William Ching; John Robinson; Mark McEntee
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2014-08-07

Review 9.  Digital radiography exposure indices: A review.

Authors:  Ursula Mothiram; Patrick C Brennan; Sarah J Lewis; Bernadette Moran; John Robinson
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2014-05-11

10.  EXPOSURE OF THE SWISS POPULATION BY RADIODIAGNOSTICS: 2013 REVIEW.

Authors:  Régis Le Coultre; Julie Bize; Mélanie Champendal; David Wittwer; Nick Ryckx; Abbas Aroua; Philipp Trueb; Francis R Verdun
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 0.972

View more
  1 in total

1.  Advances in multiscale image processing and its effects on image quality in skeletal radiography.

Authors:  Susan Notohamiprodjo; K M Roeper; F G Mueck; D Maxien; F Wanninger; B Hoberg; L Verstreepen; K M Treitl; F Fischer; O Peschel; S Wirth
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.