Selenium-based digital radiography in the detection of bone lesions: Preliminary experience with experimentally created defects

Radiology

Volumn 216, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 220-224

  Ludwig, Karl ^a   Link, Thomas M ^a   Fiebich, Martin ^a   Renger, Bernhard ^a   Diederich, Stefan ^a   Oelerich, Michael ^a   Lenzen, Horst ^a   Heindel, Walter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Animals; Bones, radiography; Femur, abnormalities; Radiography, comparative studies; Radiography, digital; Radiography, selenium detector; Radiography, storage phosphor; Selenium

Indexed keywords

PHOSPHORUS; SELENIUM;

ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BONE LESION; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; IMAGE QUALITY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC;

EID: 0033919453     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiology.216.1.r00jl08220     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. van Heesewijk HP, van der Graaf Y, de Valois JC, Vos JA, Feldberg MA. Chest imaging with a selenium detector versus conventional film radiography: a CT-controlled study. Radiology 1996; 200: 687-690.
2. Schaefer-Prokop CM, Prokop M, Schmidt A, Neitzel U, Galanski M. Selenium radiography versus storage phosphor and conventional radiography in the detection of simulated chest lesions. Radiology 1996; 201:45-50.
3. van Heesewijk HP, Neitzel U, van der Graaf Y, de Valois JC, Feldberg MA. Digital chest imaging with a selenium detector: comparison with conventional radiography for visualization of specific anatomic regions of the chest. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 165:535-540.
4. Floyd CE Jr, Baker JA, Chotas HG, Delong DM, Ravin CE. Selenium-based digital radiography of the chest: radiologists' preference compared with film-screen radiographs. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 165: 1353-1358.
5. Woodard PK, Slone RM, Gierada DS, Reiker GG, Pilgram TK, Jost RG. Chest radiography: depiction of normal anatomy and pathologic structures with selenium-based digital radiography versus conventional screen-film radiography. Radiology 1997; 203:197-201.
6. van Heesewijk HP, van der Graaf Y, de Valois JC, Feldberg AM. Digital chest imaging using a selenium detector: a simulated diffuse interstitial pulmonary disease detection study. Invest Radiol 1995; 30:300-305.
7. Kehler M, Lyttkens K, Andersson B, et al. Phantom study of chest radiography with storage phosphor, selenium, and film-screen systems. Acta Radiol 1996; 37:332-336.
8. Procacci C. Comparison between conventional radiography and Thoravision in the study of the normal chest. J Digit Imaging 1997; 10:183-184.
9. Beute GH. Chest radiographic image quality: comparison of asymmetric screen-film, digital storage phosphor, and digital selenium drum systems - preliminary study. RadioGraphics 1998; 18:745-754.
10. Neitzel U, Maack I, Gunther-Kohfahl S. Image quality of a digital chest radiography system based on a selenium detector. Med Phys 1994; 21:509-516.
11. Launders JH. A comprehensive physical image quality evaluation of a selenium-based digital x-ray imaging system for thorax radiography. Med Phys 1998; 25: 986-997.
12. Chotas HG, Floyd CE Jr, Ravin CE. Technical evaluation of a digital chest radiography system that uses a selenium detector. Radiology 1995; 195:264-270.
13. Ishida M, Frank PH, Doi K, Lehr JL. High-quality digital radiographic images: improved detection of low-contrast objects and preliminary clinical studies. RadioGraphics 1983; 3:325-338.
14. Loo LND, Doi K, Metz CE. Investigation of basic imaging properties in digital radiography. IV. Effect of unsharp masking on the detectability of simple patterns. Med Phys 1985; 12:209-214.
15. Oestmann JW, Greene R, Rubens JR, et al. High-frequency edge enhancement in the detection of fine pulmonary lines: parity between storage phosphor digital images and conventional chest radiography. Invest Radiol 1989; 24:643-646.
16. Winterer J, Neumann K, Gimpel S, Kotter E, Einert M, Langer M. Evaluierung der diagnostischen bildqualität des selenröntgendetektors in der skelettdiagnostik im vergleich zur konventionellen radiographie (abstr). Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 1998; 168:78.
17. Prokop M, Galanski M, Oestmann JW, et al. Storage phosphor versus screen-film radiography: effect of varying exposure parameters and unsharp mask filtering on the detectability of cortical bone defects. Radiology 1990; 177:109-113.
18. Link TM, Rummeny EJ, Lenzen H, Reuter I, Roos N, Peters PE. Artificial bone erosions: detection with magnification radiography versus conventional high-resolution radiography. Radiology 1994; 192: 861-864.
19. Metz C. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978; 8:283-298.
20. Hill AB. Principles of medical statistics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1971; 143-151.
21. Vandevenne JE, Lang P, Barth R, Dolph J, Bergman G. Radiation dose reduction using selenium detectors in direct digital radiography of the appendicular skeleton. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:151-152.
22. Niklason LT, Chan HP, Cascade PN, Chang CL, Chee PW, Mathews JF. Portable chest imaging: comparison of storage phosphor digital asymmetric screen-film, and conventional screen-film systems. Radiology 1993; 186:387-393.