HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2353031919v1 235/3/857    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Veldkamp, W. J. H. Articles by Geleijns, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Veldkamp, W. J. H. Articles by Geleijns, J.

Digital Slot-Scan Charge-coupled Device Radiography versus AMBER and Bucky Screen-Film Radiography: Comparison of Image Quality in a Phantom Study¹

¹ From the Departments of Radiology (W.J.H.V., L.J.M.K., J.G.) and Medical Statistics (B.J.A.M.), C2S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands. Received November 26, 2003; revision requested February 10, 2004; final revision received July 14; accepted August 26. Address correspondence to W.J.H.V. (e-mail: w.j.h.veldkamp@lumc.nl).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the image quality and performance of a chest digital radiography system and to compare this with the image quality and performance of advanced multiple-beam equalization radiography (AMBER) and Bucky screen-film radiography systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The chest digital radiography system is a digital charge-coupled device (CCD) chest imaging unit that uses slot-scan technology. A contrast-detail test object was used in combination with a phantom that simulates the primary and scatter transmission for the lungs and mediastinum. Twelve phantom images were obtained with each modality (ie, CCD digital radiography and AMBER and Bucky screen-film radiography) and were judged by six observers. CCD digital radiography soft-copy reading was compared with AMBER hard-copy reading. To measure image quality, contrast-detail curves were constructed from the observer data. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS: For the lung configuration, contrast-detail curves showed lower threshold depth for hard-copy images obtained with CCD digital radiography than for those obtained with Bucky screen-film radiography. For hard-copy images, the difference between contrast-detail curves for CCD digital radiography and those for Bucky screen-film radiography was statistically significant (P < .006). No significant difference was found between CCD digital radiography and AMBER for hard-copy images obtained in either the lung or mediastinum configuration. For the lung configuration, a lower threshold depth was observed for CCD digital radiography soft-copy reading than for AMBER hard-copy reading, with significantly different contrast-detail curves for CCD digital radiography soft copy and AMBER hard copy (P < .006). No significant difference was found between either system for the mediastinum configuration.

CONCLUSION: Contrast-detail curves indicate that image quality for the CCD chest system provides a digital alternative to AMBER and Bucky screen-film radiography.

© RSNA, 2005

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L J M Kroft, W J H Veldkamp, B J A Mertens, J-P A van Delft, and J Geleijns Dose reduction in digital chest radiography and perceived image quality Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2007; 80(960): 984 - 988. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Suryanarayanan, A. Karellas, S. Vedantham, I. Sechopoulos, and C. J. D'Orsi Detection of Simulated Microcalcifications in a Phantom with Digital Mammography: Effect of Pixel Size Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 130 - 137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				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]

				L. J. M. Kroft, W. J. H. Veldkamp, B. J. A. Mertens, J. P. A. van Delft, and J. Geleijns Detection of simulated nodules on clinical radiographs: dose reduction at digital posteroanterior chest radiography. Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 392 - 398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]