Radiology, Vol 200, 687-690, Copyright © 1996 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Chest imaging with a selenium detector versus conventional film radiography: a CT-controlled study

HP van Heesewijk, Y van der Graaf, JC de Valois, JA Vos and MA Feldberg
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein (Utrecht), The Netherlands.

PURPOSE: To compare radiologist detection performance under clinical conditions for assessment of conventional radiographs and digital chest images obtained with a selenium detector. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred four patients were examined with the digital and conventional systems under near identical technical conditions. The digital images were acquired without an antiscatter grid. Two hundred eight images were analyzed by three radiologists for detection of pulmonary, mediastinal, and pleural abnormalities; computed tomography was used as the reference standard. The diagnostic value of both techniques for the detection of these chest abnormalities was analyzed with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methods. RESULTS: For detection of the various abnormalities by all radiologists, the areas under the ROC curves with conventional imaging versus digital imaging, respectively, were as follows: pulmonary opacities, 0.81 versus 0.79; interstitial disease, 0.69 versus 0.73; mediastinal disease, 0.79 versus 0.74; and pleural abnormalities, 0.73 versus 0.68. CONCLUSION: There was no statistically significant difference between the radiologists' performance in detecting pulmonary, mediastinal, and pleural abnormalities with conventional radiography versus that with digital selenium chest radiography.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Bacher, P. Smeets, L. Vereecken, A. De Hauwere, P. Duyck, R. De Man, K. Verstraete, and H. Thierens Image quality and radiation dose on digital chest imaging: comparison of amorphous silicon and amorphous selenium flat-panel systems. Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2006; 187(3): 630 - 637. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Metz, P. Damoser, R. Hollweck, R. Roggel, C. Engelke, K. Woertler, B. Renger, E. J. Rummeny, and T. M. Link Chest Radiography with a Digital Flat-Panel Detector: Experimental Receiver Operating Characteristic Analysis Radiology, March 1, 2005; 234(3): 776 - 784. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. S. Kim, J.-G. Im, J. M. Goo, K. H. Lee, Y.-J. Lee, S. H. Kim, and S. Kim Detection of Pulmonary Edema in Pigs: Storage Phosphor versus Amorphous Selenium-based Flat-Panel-Detector Radiography Radiology, June 1, 2002; 223(3): 695 - 701. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M. Goo, J.-G. Im, J. H. Kim, J. B. Seo, T. S. Kim, S. J. Shine, and W. Lee Digital Chest Radiography with a Selenium-Based Flat-Panel Detector Versus a Storage Phosphor System: Comparison of Soft-Copy Images Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2000; 175(4): 1013 - 1018. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Ludwig, T. M. Link, M. Fiebich, B. Renger, S. Diederich, M. Oelerich, H. Lenzen, and W. Heindel Selenium-based Digital Radiography in the Detection of Bone Lesions: Preliminary Experience with Experimentally Created Defects Radiology, July 1, 2000; 216(1): 220 - 224. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M. Garmer, S. P. Hennigs, H. J. Jager, F. Schrick, T. van de Loo, A. Jacobs, A. Hanusch, A. Christmann, and K. Mathias Digital Radiography Versus Conventional Radiography in Chest Imaging: Diagnostic Performance of a Large-Area Silicon Flat-Panel Detector in a Clinical CT-Controlled Study Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2000; 174(1): 75 - 80. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. M. Bernhardt, D. Otto, G. Reichel, K. Ludwig, S. Seifert, S. Kropf, and U. Rapp-Bernhardt Detection of Simulated Interstitial Lung Disease and Catheters with Selenium, Storage Phosphor, and Film-based Radiography Radiology, November 1, 1999; 213(2): 445 - 454. [Abstract] [Full Text]