Potential image quality in scintillator-CCD-based x-ray imaging systems for digital radiography and digital mammography

1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahram Hejazi ◽  
David P. Trauernicht
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Imaging Systems ◽  
X Ray ◽  
X Ray Imaging

scholarly journals Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1699
Author(s):  
Ahmed Jibril Abdi ◽  
Bo R. Mussmann ◽  
Alistair Mackenzie ◽  
Oke Gerke ◽  
Benedikte Klaerke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Imaging System ◽  
Quality Metrics ◽  
Imaging Systems ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Image Quality Metrics ◽  
Spatial Frequencies ◽  
X Ray Imaging ◽  
Quantitative Image

The aim of this study was to determine the quantitative image quality metrics of the low-dose 2D/3D EOS slot scanner X-ray imaging system (LDSS) compared with conventional digital radiography (DR) X-ray imaging systems. The effective detective quantum efficiency (eDQE) and effective noise quantum equivalent (eNEQ) were measured using chest and knee protocols. Methods: A Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends (NEXT) of a chest adult phantom and a PolyMethylmethacrylate (PMMA) phantom were used for the chest and knee protocols, respectively. Quantitative image quality metrics, including effective normalised noise power spectrum (eNNPS), effective modulation transfer function (eMTF), eDQE and eNEQ of the LDSS and DR imaging systems were assessed and compared. Results: In the chest acquisition, the LDSS imaging system achieved significantly higher eNEQ and eDQE than the DR imaging systems at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.001 > p ≤ 0.044). For the knee acquisition, the LDSS imaging system also achieved significantly higher eNEQ and eDQE than the DR imaging systems at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.001 > p ≤ 0.002). However, there was no significant difference in eNEQ and eDQE between DR systems 1 and 2 at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.10 < p < 1.00) for either chest or knee protocols. Conclusion: The LDSS imaging system performed well compared to the DR systems. Thus, we have demonstrated that the LDSS imaging system has the potential to be used for clinical diagnostic purposes.

scholarly journals COMPARISON OF RADIATION EXPOSURE TO THE PATIENT AND CONTRAST DETAIL RESOLUTIONS ACROSS LOW DOSE 2D/3D SLOT SCANNER AND TWO CONVENTIONAL DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY X-RAY IMAGING SYSTEMS

2019 ◽  
Vol 185 (2) ◽  
pp. 252-265
Author(s):  
Ahmed Jibril Abdi ◽  
Bo Mussmann ◽  
Alistair Mackenzie ◽  
Benedikte Klaerke ◽  
Poul Erik Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Dose Level ◽  
Digital Radiography ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Simulation Software ◽  
Imaging Systems ◽  
Adult Size ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Dose Area Product ◽  
X Ray Imaging ◽  
Default Setting

Abstract Purpose To assess and compare the radiation dose and image quality of the low dose 2D/3D EOS slot scanner (LDSS) to conventional digital radiography (DR) X-ray imaging systems for chest and knee examination protocols. Methods and materials The effective doses (ED) to the patient in the chest and knee clinical examination protocols for LDSS and DR X-ray imaging systems were determined using the dose area product and PCXMC Monte Carlo simulation software. The CDRAD phantom was imaged with 19 cm, and 13 cm thick Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) blocks to simulate the chest and knees respectively of a patient of average adult size. The contrast detail resolution was calculated using image analysis software. Results The EDs for the LDSS default setting were up to 69% and 51% lower than for the DR systems for the chest (speed 4) and knee (speed 6) protocols, respectively, while for the increased dose level setting then the EDs were up to 42% and 35% lower than for the DR systems for the chest (speed 6) and knee (speed 8) protocols respectively. At the default setting, the contrast detail was lowest for the default setting of the 2D/3D low dose slot scanner (LDSS) for both chest and knee examinations, but at the highest dose levels then the threshold were equal or higher than the contrast resolution of DR imaging systems. Conclusion The LDSS has the potential to be used for clinical diagnosis of chest and knee examinations using the higher dose level. For speed 6 in chest protocol and speed 8 in knee protocol, the measured contrast detail resolution was comparable with the DR systems but at a lower effective dose.

X-ray imaging with amorphous selenium: Optimal spectra for digital mammography

1996 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 557-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Fahrig ◽  
J. A. Rowlands ◽  
Martin J. Yaffe
Keyword(s):  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Amorphous Selenium ◽  
X Ray ◽  
X Ray Imaging
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document