Relative impact of detector noise and anatomical structure on lung nodule detection

被引:19
作者
Keelan, BW [1 ]
Töpfer, K [1 ]
Yorkston, J [1 ]
Sehnert, WJ [1 ]
Ellinwood, JS [1 ]
机构
[1] Eastman Kodak Co, Rochester, NY 14650 USA
来源
MEDICAL IMAGING 2004: IMAGE PERCEPTION, OBSERVER PERFORMANCE, AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT | 2004年 / 5372卷
关键词
anatomical noise; anatoinical structure; detector noise; lung nodule; chest radiography; digital radiography; observer study; forced-choice experiment;
D O I
10.1117/12.536733
中图分类号
TB8 [摄影技术];
学科分类号
0804 ;
摘要
A four-alternative forced-choice experiment was conducted to investigate the relative impact of detector noise and anatomical structure on detection of subtle lung nodules. Sets of four independent backgrounds from each of three regions (heart, ribs, and lung field between the ribs) were derived from a very low-noise chest-phantom capture. Simulated nodules of varying contrast and fixed diameter (10 mm) were digitally added to the centers of selected background images. Subsequently, signal-dependent noise was introduced to simulate amorphous selenium radiographic detector performance at typical 80, 200, 400, 800, or higher speed class exposures. Series of four nodule contrasts each were empirically selected to yield comparable ranges of delectability index (d') for each background type and exposure level. Thirty-six observers with imaging, expertise performed the nodule detection task, for which the signal and location were known exactly. Equally detectable nodule contrasts for each background type and exposure level were computed and their squares plotted against detector noise variance. The intercepts and slopes of the linear regressions increased in the order of lung, heart, and ribs, correlating with apparent anatomical structural complexity. The regression results imply that the effect of anatomical structure dominated that of capture device noise at clinically relevant exposures and beyond.
引用
收藏
页码:230 / 241
页数:12
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
*AM NAT STAND I, 2001, ANSII3A
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1994, 61267 IEC
[3]  
BIRCH R, 1979, HOSP PHYS ASS SCI RE, V30, P12
[4]   The importance of anatomical noise in mammography [J].
Bochud, FO ;
Verdun, FR ;
Valley, JF ;
Hessler, C ;
Moeckli, R .
IMAGE PERCEPTION: MEDICAL IMAGING 1997, 1997, 3036 :74-80
[5]  
BURGESS AE, 1989, P SOC PHOTO-OPT INS, V1137, P190, DOI 10.1117/12.961735
[6]  
Cunningham I. A., 2000, HDB MED IMAGING, V1, P79
[7]  
DAINTY JC, 1974, IMAGE SCI, pCH5
[8]  
DOBBINS JT, 2000, HDB MED IMAGING, V1, P197
[9]   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
[10]   REVISED TABLE OF D' FOR M-ALTERNATIVE FORCED CHOICE [J].
HACKER, MJ ;
RATCLIFF, R .
PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 1979, 26 (02) :168-170