1 / 12

Roshan S Livingstone and Benedicta R Department of Radiology

This study aims to evaluate the performance of flat detectors (FD) in different digital radiography systems using a simple in-house test tool. Factors affecting image quality, such as training of operators, exposure factors, detector dependence, and post-processing software algorithms, were analyzed. The results showed that FDs exhibit similar sensitivity to film-screen combinations and contrast variations based on grid usage. This method can be used to assess contrast enhancement ratio, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), detector sensitivity, and compare image quality among different detectors.

lavette
Download Presentation

Roshan S Livingstone and Benedicta R Department of Radiology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quantitative assessment of image quality in different digital radiography systems Roshan S Livingstone and Benedicta R Department of Radiology Christian Medical College, Vellore, S India Vision statement: The Christian Medical college, Vellore seeks to be a witness to the healing ministry of Christ through excellence in education, service and research

  2. Introduction • Images acquired using flat detectors (FD) in Digital radiography (DR) has increased tremendously compared to conventional film-screen radiography due to its varied advantages • Prolonged use of FD and its influence on image quality is not fully understood • Assessment of image quality from radiological images are generally qualitative/subjective in nature • A simple method of testing quality of DR images need to be established for quantitative analysis

  3. Factors affecting image quality in flat detectors • Training of DR operator • Are we ready? • Selecting optimal exposure factors? • Flat Detector dependence • Types - CsI/GOS • Temperature • Image resolution – Spatial and contrast • Post processing software algorithms • Radiation exposure

  4. Aim To evaluate the performance of FDs using a simple in-house test tool in 5 different DR units • Siemens Multix Fusion • GE • Siemens Aristos • Philips Diagnost • (2 x-ray units)

  5. Materials and methods Dose Area Product (DAP) meter Unfors – Solid state dosimeter Perspex block Aluminium step wedge Checking output consistency in all DR systems – 60 kV, 20 mAs, 100cm Similar size region of interest (ROI) on images Assessment of image quality using Centricity software (GE Centricity, USA)

  6. Experimental setup DAP meter 43 cm 43 cm Standardisation Automated selection of exposure factors (AEC) in all machines Maintaining a constant DAP values – without AEC in all machines Experimental setup in Siemens Multix fusion

  7. Image quality analysis Calculating Signal to noise ratio (SNR) and Contrast to noise ratio (CNR) Measuring pixel value SNR(step wedge) = Pixel value(step wedge) Noise Step wedge 1 CNR = Pixel value(step wedge) - Pixel value(Perspex) Noise Perspex phantom 2 3 1 – Mean pixel value from step wedge 2 – Mean pixel value from perspex 3 – Mean pixel value for noise Image quality assessment using Centricity software (GE Centricity, USA) from picture archival communication system (PACS) workstation

  8. RESULTS • Curve/slope similar to film screen • FDs response to a x-ray exposure – determines sensitivity • Dynamic range and wide latitude in FD compared to film Characteristic Curve of a film

  9. RESULTS Useful density of the film-screen 0.2 - 3 2 yrs 10 yrs 7 yrs algorithm

  10. RESULTS – Contrast to Noise ratio 1 2 CNR = Pixel value(step wedge) - Pixel value(Perspex) Noise

  11. Discussion and Conclusion • Both qualitative and quantitative assessment of image quality – SNR and CNR • All detectors exhibited similar sensitivity corresponding to a film screen combination (0.2 – 2.8 au of SNR) • Contrast variations were observed with the use of grid (reduction of noise) and non grid • The resolution of the image depended on the software algorithms and preset protocol selected • For higher tube potentials, different stepwedge is required

  12. Summary • This simple method serves as image quality assessment tool to study the following; • Contrast enhancement ratio of detectors • Signal to noise ratio (SNR) • Contrast to noise ratio (CNR) • Sensitivity of the detector • Compare image quality between different detectors • Study optimal exposure factors required for imaging Disclosure: No funding involved Conflicts of interest : NIL

More Related