The detective quantum efficiency of fluoroscopic systems: The case for a spatial-temporal approach (or, does the ideal observer have infinite patience?)

被引:17
作者
Cunningham, IA [1 ]
Moschandreou, T [1 ]
Subotic, V [1 ]
机构
[1] John P Robarts Res Inst, Imaging Res Labs, London, ON N6A 5K8, Canada
来源
MEDICAL IMAGING 2001: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING | 2001年 / 4320卷
关键词
noise power spectrum; detective quantum efficiency; fluoroscopy; detector lag; spatial-temporal NPS; spatial-temporal DQE;
D O I
10.1117/12.430871
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 [生物医学工程];
摘要
The detective quantum efficiency (DQE) of an imaging system describes how well the ideal observer performs for a specific imaging detection task. While it can be calculated from measured image data and used to quantify system performance, it is rarely used for assessing fluoroscopic systems. This is primarily due to the effects of system tag. Lag results in a temporal averaging of image signals that reduces noise. As a consequence, the measured DQE of fluoroscopic systems having lag will be erroneously high relative to systems having less lag. This effect can be substantial, resulting in measures of the DQE that can be 15-40% greater than the "lag-free", DQE. The description of a spatial-temporal NPS and DQE is presented as a means of accommodating system tag. The spatial-temporal NPS has units mm(2)s and the spatial-temporal DQE is unitless. Using this generalized interpretation, the (conventional) spatial NPS and DQE are described as sections of the spatial-temporal NPS and DQE along the zero temporal-frequency axis. Calculation of spatial-temporal metrics requires determining an effective temporal aperture related to the temporal MTF. It is shown, both theoretically and experimentally, that the spatial component of the spatial-temporal DQE of a system operating in a fluoroscopic mode is the same as the conventional DQE of the same system operating in a radiographic mode under quantum-noise limited conditions.
引用
收藏
页码:479 / 488
页数:10
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]
A SIMPLE METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE MODULATION TRANSFER-FUNCTION IN DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY [J].
FUJITA, H ;
TSAI, DY ;
ITOH, T ;
DOI, K ;
MORISHITA, J ;
UEDA, K ;
OHTSUKA, A .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, 1992, 11 (01) :34-39
[2]
Performance characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat panel X-ray imaging detector [J].
Granfors, PR .
MEDICAL IMAGING 1999: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1 AND 2, 1999, 3659 :480-490
[3]
DQE(f) of an amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector: Detector parameter influences and measurement methodology [J].
Granfors, PR ;
Aufrichtig, R .
MEDICAL IMAGING 2000: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2000, 3977 :2-13
[4]
ICRU, 1995, 54 ICRU
[5]
MYERS KJ, 2000, IDEAL OBSERVER MODEL, P559
[6]
A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device [J].
Samei, E ;
Flynn, MJ ;
Reimann, DA .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1998, 25 (01) :102-113
[7]
Shaw R., 1975, P SOC PHOTO-OPT INS, V70, P359
[8]
Empirical and theoretical investigation of the noise performance of indirect detection, active matrix flat-panel imagers (AMFPIs) for diagnostic radiology [J].
Siewerdsen, JH ;
Antonuk, LE ;
ElMohri, Y ;
Yorkston, J ;
Huang, W ;
Boudry, JM ;
Cunningham, IA .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1997, 24 (01) :71-89
[9]
Cone-beam computed tomography with a flat-panel imager: Effects of image lag [J].
Siewerdsen, JH ;
Jaffray, DA .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (12) :2635-2647
[10]
Van Metter, 2000, APPL LINEAR SYSTEMS, P79