The results of this pilot study show that the radiation dose during CTC can be reduced 50% below currently accepted low-dose techniques without significantly affecting image quality when ASIR is used. Further evaluation in a larger patient group is warranted.
The experimental MAR reconstruction algorithm significantly improved CT image quality for patients with large metal implants. However, the MAR algorithm introduced blurring artifact that reduced image quality with small metal implants.
Fifteen large-area, flat-panel displays used for clinical image review were evaluated for image quality and compared with 30 comparably sized cathode ray tube (CRT) monitors. Measurements were of image display patterns by Video Electronic Standards Association (VESA) and a commercial product. Field measurements were made of: maximum and minimum luminance, ambient lighting, characteristic curve (gamma), point shape and size, high-contrast resolution, uniformity, and distortion. Assessments were made of pixel defects, latent image patterns, ghosting artifacts, and viewing angle luminance. Also, a questionnaire was generated for users of the flat-panel and CRT units. Seventeen respondents indicated no preference for either flat panel or CRT. Results show these flat panels to have higher luminance (mean, 177.7 cd/m2); larger number of just noticeable differences (JNDs; n = 555), higher gamma, comparable uniformity, and warm-up time. CRTs had less angle viewing dependence and far fewer artifacts (ghosting and latent images). Our questionnaire showed active matrix liquid crystal displays (AMLCD) to be fully acceptable for clinical image viewing. Furthermore, the statistical results show that further testing for new AMLCDs of this type is unwarranted.
Purpose: To describe a testing workflow for generation, transfer, and use of DICOM Radiation Dose Structured Reports (RDSRs). Methods: Equipment supporting RDSR was acceptance tested to validate the creation of report, and to validate reported parameters. A Computed Tomography (CT) scanner and three x‐ray angiographic (XA) suites were tested. Testing of the RDSR includes; validating creation and viewing of reports on acquisition device, transfer of reports from device to viewing workstations, storage of objects in PACS archive and in a quality assurance tool (DICOM parsing database), reviewing report data in comparison to in‐room displayed values or image DICOM field values. Results: At installation, each acquisition device needed to be configured to create DICOM RDSR, and none allowed viewing. Our PACS archive would not display report, but was able to receive and store the RDSR. Retrieval of RDSRs to a workstation with a viewer was allowed. A DICOM receiver was configured to accept the reports, parse the parameters, and store information in a database. Selected parameters from CT RDSRs include CTDIvol, DLP, and body part for irradiation events. RDSRs from angiographic suites include air kerma, kerma area product, as well as patient and C‐arm geometry for each footswitch event. Conclusions: Although the Radiation Dose Structured Report is not fully integrated between acquisition devices, viewing workstations, and image archives, a workflow can be developed to view and validate the RDSR. The RDSR is a valuable tool providing information needed for patient dosimetry.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.