Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Strotzer, M.
Right arrow Articles by Feuerbach, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Strotzer, M.
Right arrow Articles by Feuerbach, S.
(Radiology. 2000;215:512-515.)
© RSNA, 2000


Experimental Studies

Simulated Bone Erosions in a Hand Phantom: Detection with Conventional Screen-Film Technology versus Cesium Iodide-Amorphous Silicon Flat-Panel Detector1

Michael Strotzer, MD, Markus Völk, MD, Thomas Wild, MD, Philipp von Landenberg, MD and Stefan Feuerbach, MD

1 From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany. Received February 4, 1999; revision requested April 1; revision received August 23; accepted September 14. Address correspondence to M.S.

PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic performance of an active-matrix flat-panel x-ray detector for reduced-dose imaging of simulated arthritic lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A digital x-ray detector based on cesium iodide and amorphous silicon technology with a panel size of 43 x 43 cm, matrix of 3,000 x 3,000 pixels, pixel size of 143 µm, and digital output of 14 bits was used. State-of-the-art screen-film radiographs were compared with digital images obtained at doses equivalent to those obtained with system speeds of 400, 560, and 800. The phantom was composed of a human hand skeleton on an acrylic plate with drilled holes simulating bone erosions of different diameters and depths. Results of four independent observers were evaluated with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis.

RESULTS: The cesium iodide and amorphous silicon detector resulted in better diagnostic performance than did the screen-film combination, with the dose being the same for both modalities (P < .05). For digital images obtained at reduced doses, no significant differences were found.

CONCLUSION: The improved diagnostic performance with digital radiographs obtained with the cesium iodide and amorphous silicon detector suggests that this detector technology holds promise in terms of dose reduction for specific diagnostic tasks, without loss of diagnostic accuracy.

Index terms: Bones, radiography, 40.1215 • Flat panel detector • Radiography, comparative studies, 40.11, 40.1215 • Radiography, digital, 40.1215 • Radiography, technology • Screens and films




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. Wirth, M. Treitl, M. F. Reiser, and M. Korner
Imaging Performance with Different Doses in Skeletal Radiography: Comparison of a Needle-structured and a Conventional Storage Phosphor System with a Flat-Panel Detector
Radiology, January 1, 2009; 250(1): 152 - 160.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
P. L. Kleinman, D. Zurakowski, K. J. Strauss, R. H. Cleveland, J. M. Perez-Rosello, D. P. Nichols, K. H. Zou, and P. K. Kleinman
Detection of Simulated Inflicted Metaphyseal Fractures in a Fetal Pig Model: Image Optimization and Dose Reduction with Computed Radiography
Radiology, May 1, 2008; 247(2): 381 - 390.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
M. Korner, C. H. Weber, S. Wirth, K.-J. Pfeifer, M. F. Reiser, and M. Treitl
Advances in Digital Radiography: Physical Principles and System Overview
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 675 - 686.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
Y. Hatakeyama, S. Kakeda, N. Ohnari, J. Moriya, N. Oda, K. Nishino, W. Miyamoto, and Y. Korogi
Reduction of Radiation Dose for Cerebral Angiography Using Flat Panel Detector of Direct Conversion Type: A Vascular Phantom Study
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., April 1, 2007; 28(4): 645 - 650.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
V. Neofotistou, V. Tsapaki, S. Kottou, A. Schreiner-Karoussou, and E. Vano
Does digital imaging decrease patient dose? A pilot study and review of the literature
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 204 - 210.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
U. Rapp-Bernhardt, T. M. Bernhardt, H. Lenzen, R. Esseling, F. W. Roehl, M. Schiborr, I. Theobald-Hormann, and W. Heindel
Experimental Evaluation of a Portable Indirect Flat-Panel Detector for the Pediatric Chest: Comparison with Storage Phosphor Radiography at Different Exposures by Using a Chest Phantom
Radiology, November 1, 2005; 237(2): 485 - 491.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Suzuki, S. Furui, I. Kobayashi, T. Yamauchi, H. Kohtake, K. Takeshita, K. Takada, and M. Yamagishi
Radiation Dose to Patients and Radiologists During Transcatheter Arterial Embolization: Comparison of a Digital Flat-Panel System and Conventional Unit
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2005; 185(4): 855 - 859.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
M. Mazumdar
Group Sequential Design for Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies: Implications and Guidelines for Practitioners
Med Decis Making, October 1, 2004; 24(5): 525 - 533.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
M. Uffmann, C. Schaefer-Prokop, U. Neitzel, M. Weber, C. J. Herold, and M. Prokop
Skeletal Applications for Flat-Panel versus Storage-Phosphor Radiography: Effect of Exposure on Detection of Low-Contrast Details
Radiology, May 1, 2004; 231(2): 506 - 514.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
K. Ludwig, K. Ahlers, D. Wormanns, M. Freund, T. M. Bernhardt, S. Diederich, and W. Heindel
Lumbar Spine Radiography: Digital Flat-Panel Detector versus Screen-Film and Storage-Phosphor Systems in Monkeys as a Pediatric Model
Radiology, October 1, 2003; 229(1): 140 - 144.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
U. Rapp-Bernhardt, F. W. Roehl, R. C. Gibbs, H. Schmidl, U. W. Krause, and T. M. Bernhardt
Flat-Panel X-ray Detector Based on Amorphous Silicon versus Asymmetric Screen-Film System: Phantom Study of Dose Reduction and Depiction of Simulated Findings
Radiology, May 1, 2003; 227(2): 484 - 492.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
K. Ludwig, C. Schulke, S. Diederich, D. Wormanns, H. Lenzen, T. M. Bernhardt, P. Brinckmann, and W. Heindel
Detection of Subtle Undisplaced Rib Fractures in a Porcine Model: Radiation Dose Requirement--Digital Flat-Panel versus Screen-Film and Storage-Phosphor Systems
Radiology, April 1, 2003; 227(1): 163 - 168.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. Fink, P. J. Hallscheidt, G. Noeldge, A. Kampschulte, B. Radeleff, W. P. Hosch, G. W. Kauffmann, and J. Hansmann
Clinical Comparative Study with a Large-Area Amorphous Silicon Flat-Panel Detector: Image Quality and Visibility of Anatomic Structures on Chest Radiography
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2002; 178(2): 481 - 486.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
A. Y. Kim, K. S. Cho, K.-S. Song, J. H. Kim, J.-G. Kim, and H. K. Ha
Urinary Calculi on Computed Radiography: Comparison of Observer Performance with Hard-Copy Versus Soft-Copy Images on Different Viewer Systems
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2001; 177(2): 331 - 335.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
K. Ludwig, H. Lenzen, K.-F. Kamm, T. M. Link, S. Diederich, D. Wormanns, and W. Heindel
Performance of a Flat-Panel Detector in Detecting Artificial Bone Lesions: Comparison with Conventional Screen-Film and Storage-Phosphor Radiography
Radiology, February 1, 2002; 222(2): 453 - 459.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]