Lumbar spine radiography: Digital flat-panel detector versus screen-film and storage-phosphor systems in monkeys as a pediatric model

被引:15
作者
Ludwig, K [1 ]
Ahlers, K [1 ]
Wormanns, D [1 ]
Freund, M [1 ]
Bernhardt, TM [1 ]
Diederich, S [1 ]
Heindel, W [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Munster, Dept Clin Radiol, D-4400 Munster, Germany
关键词
animals; experimental study; flat panel detector; radiography; comparative studies; digital; in infants and children; storage phosphor; spine;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2291020717
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To assess image quality and exposure dose requirements of a flat-panel detector system versus screen-film and storage-phosphor systems for radiographic depiction of the lumbar spine in Cynomolgus monkeys as a pediatric model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty Cynomolgus monkeys underwent anteroposterior radiography of the lumbar spine. The size and weight of these monkeys are comparable to those of infants 3-4 months of age. Images were acquired with speed class 400 screen-film, flat-panel, and storage-phosphor systems with identical exposure dose. All other conditions were matched exactly. Additional images were acquired with the flat-panel and storage-phosphor systems at exposure doses equivalent to speed classes 800 and 1600. All images were obtained at 66 kVp without antiscatter grid. Images were assessed independently by three radiologists for visibility of 60 anatomic structures by using a five-point confidence scale. Scores were calculated for the seven combinations of imaging mode and exposure dose and were compared by using the Friedman test. RESULTS: Scores were 1.70 (speed class 400), 1.97 (speed class 800), and 2.27 (speed class 1600) for the flat-panel system; 2.50 (speed class 400) for the screen-film system; and 2.58 (speed class 400), 2.77 (speed class 800), and 3.13 (speed class 1600) for the storage-phosphor system. Scores for the flat-panel system at speed classes 400 and 800 were significantly lower (indicating better visibility) than those of the screen-film and storage-phosphor systems (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The flat-panel system is superior to screen-film and storage-phosphor systems in lumbar spine radiography in monkeys. With the flat-panel system, exposure dose can be reduced by 75% without loss in image quality. (C) RSNA, 2003.
引用
收藏
页码:140 / 144
页数:5
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   Workflow comparison of DR and screen-film dedicated chest systems [J].
Andriole, KP ;
Luth, DM ;
Gould, RG .
MEDICAL IMAGING 2001: PACS AND INTEGRATED MEDICAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS: DESIGN AND EVALUATION, 2001, 4323 :203-206
[2]  
BRANDT I, 1986, HUMAN GROWTH COMPREH, V1
[3]   Principles of digital radiography with large-area, electronically readable detectors: A review of the basics [J].
Chotas, HG ;
Dobbins, JT ;
Ravin, CE .
RADIOLOGY, 1999, 210 (03) :595-599
[4]   Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: Image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography [J].
Fink, C ;
Hallscheidt, PJ ;
Noeldge, G ;
Kampschulte, A ;
Radeleff, B ;
Hosch, WP ;
Kauffmann, GW ;
Hansmann, J .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2002, 178 (02) :481-486
[5]   Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography [J].
Floyd, CE ;
Warp, RJ ;
Dobbins, JT ;
Chotas, HG ;
Baydush, AH ;
Vargas-Voracek, R ;
Ravin, CE .
RADIOLOGY, 2001, 218 (03) :683-688
[6]   Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging:: Diagnostic performance of a large-area silicon flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study [J].
Garmer, M ;
Hennigs, SP ;
Jäger, HJ ;
Schrick, F ;
van de Loo, T ;
Jacobs, A ;
Hanusch, A ;
Christmann, A ;
Mathias, K .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2000, 174 (01) :75-80
[7]   Performance of a 41X41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications [J].
Granfors, PR ;
Aufrichtig, R .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2000, 27 (06) :1324-1331
[8]   Digital radiography with a large-scale electronic flat-panel detector vs screen-film radiography: observer preference in clinical skeletal diagnostics [J].
Hamers, S ;
Freyschmidt, J ;
Neitzel, U .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2001, 11 (09) :1753-1759
[9]   Digital chest radiography with a large-area flat-panel silicon X-ray detector: clinical comparison with conventional radiography [J].
Hennigs, SP ;
Garmer, M ;
Jaeger, HJ ;
Classen, R ;
Jacobs, A ;
Gissler, HM ;
Christmann, A ;
Mathias, K .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2001, 11 (09) :1688-1696
[10]   Chest imaging with flat-panel detector at low and standard doses:: comparison with storage phosphor technology in normal patients [J].
Herrmann, KA ;
Bonél, H ;
Stäbler, A ;
Kulinna, C ;
Glaser, C ;
Holzknecht, N ;
Geiger, B ;
Schätzl, M ;
Reiser, MF .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2002, 12 (02) :385-390