Russian satellite ECOL as a possible element for the EOS system

1993 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Dobrozrakov ◽  
A. Germanov ◽  
G. Guskov ◽  
A. Karasyov ◽  
Viatcheslav M. Kovtunenko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2013 ◽  
Vol 411-414 ◽  
pp. 684-687
Author(s):  
Wei He ◽  
Yan Gan Zhang ◽  
Xue Guang Yuan ◽  
Jin Nan Zhang

We propose an optimization approach to EoS (Ethernet over SDH) buffer control which the objective is to dynamically adjust the EoS buffer management registers. We will present the improved model of the traffic buffer management based on embedded MCU to control the SDRAM of the EoS chip, and setup the end-to-end system to illustrate the feasibility and advantage of the solution in buffer management when the data transport rate suddenly exceed the bandwidth of Ethernet port.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aria Bagheri ◽  
Xue-Cheng Liu ◽  
Channing Tassone ◽  
John Thometz ◽  
Sergey Tarima

2018 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
pp. 415-417
Author(s):  
S. van Drongelen ◽  
B. Fey ◽  
F. Stief ◽  
H. Kaldowski ◽  
D. Ipek ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
E Sapin ◽  
K Briot ◽  
S Kolta ◽  
P Gravel ◽  
W Skalli ◽  
...  

To predict bone strength in the case of osteoporosis, it could be a real benefit to assess the three-dimensional (3D) geometry and the bone mineral density (BMD) with a single low-dose X-ray device, such as the EOS system (Biospace Med, Paris, France). EOS 3D reconstructions of the spine have already been validated. Thus, this study aims at evaluating the accuracy of this low-dose system as a densitometer first ex vivo. The European Spine Phantom (ESP) (number 129) was scanned ten times using both the EOS and a Hologic device (Hologic, Inc., Massachusetts, USA). Accuracy was given by the sum of the systematic error (difference between BMDs assessed and true values given by the phantom manufacturer) and the random error (coefficient of variation). EOS BMDs and Hologic BMDs of 41 ex-vivo vertebrae were calculated and compared. The reproducibility of the method evaluating the EOS BMD was assessed giving the coefficient of variation of three measurements of the 41 vertebrae. The accuracy of the EOS system is below 5.2 per cent, versus 7.2 per cent for the Hologic system in the same conditions. EOS BMDs are significantly higher than Hologic BMDs, but they are strongly correlated. The reproducibility of the method of assessment is equal to 0.95 per cent. The EOS system is accurate for ex-vivo BMD assessments, which is promising regarding the use of this new system to predict vertebral strength.


2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-121
Author(s):  
J M Vital ◽  
J Dubousset ◽  
O Gille ◽  
O Hauger ◽  
N Aurouer ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Hecker ◽  
Till D. Lerch ◽  
Rainer J. Egli ◽  
Emanuel F. Liechti ◽  
Frank M. Klenke

Abstract Background One of the values determined during the assessment of knee issues is the posterior tibial slope (PTS). A new option for measuring the PTS is the EOS 3D imaging system, which provides anteroposterior (AP) and lateral long leg radiographs (LLRs) using less radiation than a conventional LLR. We investigated the reliability of the EOS 3D imaging system with respect to PTS measurements. Methods We retrospectively searched our radiological database for patients who underwent an EOS scan and a computed tomography (CT) scan of their lower extremities between January and December 2019. Fifty-six knees were included in the study. Medial and lateral PTSs were determined using both modalities. A radiologist and an orthopaedic surgeon each performed all measurements twice and the intraclass correlation (ICC) was calculated to assess inter- and intrarater reliability. The Student t test and Pearson correlation were used to compare the results of both imaging modalities. Results The mean medial PTS was 8.5° (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1–8.9°) for the EOS system and 7.7° (95% CI, 7.3–8.1°) for CT, and the lateral PTS was 7.4° (95% CI, 6.9–7.9°) for the EOS system, and 7.0° (95% CI, 6.5–7.4°) for CT. Interrater reliability (ICC) with respect to medial and lateral PTSs measured on the EOS (0.880, 0.765) and CT (0.884, 0.887) images was excellent. The intrarater reliability of reader 1 (ICC range, 0.889–0.986) and reader 2 (ICC range, 0.868–0.980) with respect to the same measurements was excellent. Conclusion The PTS measurements from the EOS 3D imaging system are as reliable and reproducible as those from CT, the current gold standard method. We recommend using this system if possible, because it acquires more information (sagittal plane) in a scan than a conventional LLR, while exposing the patient to less radiation. Level of evidence Level III, Retrospective cohort study


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document