Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography

Sund, Patrik; Båth, Magnus; Kheddache, Susanne; Månsson, Lars Gunnar

doi:10.1007/s00330-003-1971-z

Cited by 89 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Visual grading characteristic (VGC) analysis is a method to evaluate the performance of different radiographic systems and has previously been applied in similar studies 17–19 . Evaluating physical parameters is important to standardize examination procedures but it does not necessarily allow predictions about the clinical performance of radiographs 24 . Visual grading in contrast uses anatomical criteria for a visibility assessment 25 , therefore offering an objective link to clinical interpretations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Needle-based storage-phosphor detector radiography is superior to a conventional powder-based storage phosphor detector and a high-resolution screen-film system in small patients (budgerigars and mice)

Tebrün

Ludewig

Köhler

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This method comparison study used radiographs of 20 mice and 20 budgerigars to investigate comparability between computed radiography (CR) and high-resolution screen-film systems and study the effects of reduced radiation doses on image quality of digital radiographs of small patients. Exposure settings used with the mammography screen-film system (SF) were taken as baseline settings. A powder-based storage-phosphor system (CR P ) and a needle-based storage-phosphor system (CR N ) were used with the same settings (D/100%) and half the detector dose (D/50%). Using a scoring system four reviewers assessed five criteria per species covering soft tissue and bone structures. Results were evaluated for differences between reviewers (interobserver variability), systems and settings (intersystem variability, using visual grading characteristic analysis). Correlations were significant (p ≤ 0.05) for interobserver variability in 86.7% of the cases. Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.206 to 0.772. For mice and budgerigars, the CR N system was rated as superior to the SF and CR P system for most criteria, being significant in two cases each. Comparing the SF and CR P system, the conventional method scored higher for all criteria, in one case significantly. For both species and both digital systems, dose reduction to 50% resulted in significantly worse scores for most criteria. In summary, the needle-based storage-phosphor technique proved to be superior compared to the conventional storage-phosphor and mammography screen-film system. Needle-based detector systems are suitable substitutes for high-resolution screen–film systems when performing diagnostic imaging of small patients. Dose reduction to 50% of the corresponding dose needed in high-resolution film-screen systems cannot be recommended.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Needle-based storage-phosphor detector radiography is superior to a conventional powder-based storage phosphor detector and a high-resolution screen-film system in small patients (budgerigars and mice)

Tebrün

Ludewig

Köhler

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…S and T are the number of structures and Thiel body’s, respectively 9 and 3. The latter scoring reflected the image quality of the individual images without using a reference image [ 18 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation of clinical and physical-technical image quality in chest CT: a human cadaver study applied on iterative reconstruction

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe first aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between clinical and physical-technical image quality applied to different strengths of iterative reconstruction in chest CT images using Thiel cadaver acquisitions and Catphan images. The second aim was to determine the potential dose reduction of iterative reconstruction compared to conventional filtered back projection based on different clinical and physical-technical image quality parameters.MethodsClinical image quality was assessed using three Thiel embalmed human cadavers. A Catphan phantom was used to assess physical-technical image quality parameters such as noise, contrast-detail and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR).Both Catphan and chest Thiel CT images were acquired on a multislice CT scanner at 120 kVp and 0.9 pitch. Six different refmAs settings were applied (12, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150refmAs) and each scan was reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) algorithms (1,3 and 5 strengths) using a sharp kernel, resulting in 24 image series. Four radiologists assessed the clinical image quality, using a visual grading analysis (VGA) technique based on the European Quality Criteria for Chest CT.ResultsCorrelation coefficients between clinical and physical-technical image quality varied from 0.88 to 0.92, depending on the selected physical-technical parameter. Depending on the strength of SAFIRE, the potential dose reduction based on noise, CNR and the inverse image quality figure (IQFinv) varied from 14.0 to 67.8 %, 16.0 to 71.5 % and 22.7 to 50.6 % respectively. Potential dose reduction based on clinical image quality varied from 27 to 37.4 %, depending on the strength of SAFIRE.ConclusionOur results demonstrate that noise assessments in a uniform phantom overestimate the potential dose reduction for the SAFIRE IR algorithm. Since the IQFinv based dose reduction is quite consistent with the clinical based dose reduction, an optimised contrast-detail phantom could improve the use of contrast-detail analysis for image quality assessment in chest CT imaging. In conclusion, one should be cautious to evaluate the performance of CT equipment taking into account only physical-technical parameters as noise and CNR, as this might give an incomplete representation of the actual clinical image quality performance.

show abstract

“…These physical characteristics are indicators of overall system performance; however, no physical measurement correlated perfectly with the perceived diagnostic performance. Therefore, clinical performance cannot be predicted from the physical characteristics of the monitors themselves, and additional observer performance studies are needed to further evaluate this finding ( 10 ). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that focuses on diagnostic performance using LCD monitors with an LED backlight.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A potential preference bias for each observer could not be eliminated because both monitor types could be readily identified. While color LCD monitors with two different backlight systems were compared in this study, it is known that the native brightness and contrast of monochrome displays are higher than those of color LCD displays ( 10 ). Further studies are therefore needed to evaluate the utility of monochrome LCD monitors with LED backlights.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpretation of Digital Chest Radiographs: Comparison of Light Emitting Diode versus Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp Backlit Monitors

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo compare the diagnostic performance of light emitting diode (LED) backlight monitors and cold cathode fluorescent lamp (CCFL) monitors for the interpretation of digital chest radiographs.Materials and MethodsWe selected 130 chest radiographs from health screening patients. The soft copy image data were randomly sorted and displayed on a 3.5 M LED (2560 × 1440 pixels) monitor and a 3 M CCFL (2048 × 1536 pixels) monitor. Eight radiologists rated their confidence in detecting nodules and abnormal interstitial lung markings (ILD). Low dose chest CT images were used as a reference standard. The performance of the monitor systems was assessed by analyzing 2080 observations and comparing them by multi-reader, multi-case receiver operating characteristic analysis. The observers reported visual fatigue and a sense of heat. Radiant heat and brightness of the monitors were measured.ResultsMeasured brightness was 291 cd/m2 for the LED and 354 cd/m2 for the CCFL monitor. Area under curves for nodule detection were 0.721 ± 0.072 and 0.764 ± 0.098 for LED and CCFL (p = 0.173), whereas those for ILD were 0.871 ± 0.073 and 0.844 ± 0.068 (p = 0.145), respectively. There were no significant differences in interpretation time (p = 0.446) or fatigue score (p = 0.102) between the two monitors. Sense of heat was lower for the LED monitor (p = 0.024). The temperature elevation was 6.7℃ for LED and 12.4℃ for the CCFL monitor.ConclusionAlthough the LED monitor had lower maximum brightness compared with the CCFL monitor, soft copy reading of the digital chest radiographs on LED and CCFL showed no difference in terms of diagnostic performance. In addition, LED emitted less heat.

show abstract

Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography

Cited by 89 publications

References 27 publications

Needle-based storage-phosphor detector radiography is superior to a conventional powder-based storage phosphor detector and a high-resolution screen-film system in small patients (budgerigars and mice)

Needle-based storage-phosphor detector radiography is superior to a conventional powder-based storage phosphor detector and a high-resolution screen-film system in small patients (budgerigars and mice)

Correlation of clinical and physical-technical image quality in chest CT: a human cadaver study applied on iterative reconstruction

Interpretation of Digital Chest Radiographs: Comparison of Light Emitting Diode versus Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp Backlit Monitors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About