Detection of rib fractures in an abused infant using digital radiography: A laboratory study

Pediatric Radiology

Volumn 32, Issue 12, 2002, Pages 896-901

  Kleinman, Paul K ^a,i   O'Connor, Brian ^b   Nimkin, Katherine ^c   Rayder, Shawn M ^d   Spevak, Melissa R ^e   Belanger, Patricia L ^f   Getty, David J ^g   Karellas, Andrew ^h  

^a University of Massachusetts   (United States)

^b New England Medical Center ^*  (United States)

^c TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d CAPE COD HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^g BBN TECHNOLOGIES   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

ⁱ BOSTON CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Child abuse; Digital radiography; Fractures

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTOPSY; BONE INJURY; CHILD ABUSE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGING SYSTEM; INFANT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABORATORY TEST; MEDICAL ASSESSMENT; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; PEDIATRICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIOLOGIST; RIB FRACTURE; ROC CURVE; SCREENING TEST; X RAY FILM;

AUTOPSY; CHILD; CHILD ABUSE; FEMALE; HUMANS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RIB FRACTURES; ROC CURVE;

EID: 0036946817     PISSN: 03010449     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00247-002-0778-4     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. American College of Radiology (1997) ACR standards. Standards for skeletal surveys in children, Res. 22. Reston, Va, p 23
2. Youmans DC, Don S, Hildebolt C, et al (1998) Skeletal surveys for child abuse: comparison of interpretation using digitized images and screen-film radiographs. AJR 171:1415-1419
3. Brown PH, Silberberg PJ, Primack SL, et al(2001) Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, USA. Skeletal surveys using computed radiography (CR) in suspected child abuse: does CR meet the American College of Radiology (ACR) standards? Pediatr Radiol [Suppl 1]31:36
4. Ludwig K, Link TM, Feibich M, et al (2000) Selenium-based digital radiography in the detection of bone lesions: preliminary experience with experimentally created defects. Radiology 216:220-224.
5. Strotzer M, Volk M, Wild T, et al (2000) Simulated bone erosions in a hand phantom: detection with conventional screen-film technology versus cesium iodide-amorphous silicon flat-panel detector. Radiology 215:512-515
6. Link TM, Rummeny EJ, Lenzen H, et al (1994) Artificial bone erosions: detection with magnification radiography versus conventional high-resolution radiography. Radiology 192:861-864
7. Prokop M, Galanski M, Oestmann JW, et al (1990) Storage phosphor versus screen-film radiography: effect of varying exposure parameters and unsharp mask filtering on the detectability of cortical bone defects. Radiology 177:109-113
8. Fink U, Schwerdtfeger J, Fink BK, et al (1996) Digital luminescence radiography in comparison with the conventional film-screen technique in diagnosis of fractures. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 164:275-280
9. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV (1995) Multireader, multicase receiver operating characteristic methodology a bootstrap analysis. Acad Radiol 2:626-633
10. Swets JA, Pickett RM (1982) Evaluation of diagnostic systems. Academic Press, New York, pp 64-66
11. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148:839-843
12. US Department of Health and Human Services (1996) The third national incidence study of child abuse and neglect. US Government Printing Office, Washington DC
13. McClain PW, Sacks, JJ, Foehlke, et al (1993) Estimates of fatal child abuse and neglect, United States, 1979 through 1988. Pediatrics 91:338-343
14. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr, Richmond JM, et al (1995) Inflicted skeletal injury: a postmortem radiologic-histopathologic study in 31 infants. AJR 165:647-650
15. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr, Adams VI, et al (1988) Factors affecting visualization of posterior rib fractures in abused infants. AJR 150:635-638
16. Kleinman PK, Marks SC Jr, Nimkin K, et al (1996) Rib fractures in 31 abused infants: postmortem radiologic-histopathologic study. Radiology 200:807-810
17. Alexander R, Crabbe L, Sato Y, et al (1990) Serial abuse in children who are shaken. AJDC 144:58-60
18. Granfors PR, Aufrichtig R (2000) Performance of a 41×41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications. Med Phys 27:1324-31
19. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, et al (2000) Mammographic imaging with a small format CCD-based digital cassette: physical characteristics of a clinical system. Med Phys 27:1832-40
20. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, et al (2000) Full breast digital mammographic imaging with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype. Med Phys 27:558-567
21. Floyd CE Jr, Warp RJ, Dobbins JT 3rd, et al (2001) Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography. Radiology 218:683-8
22. Moy JP (2000) Signal-to-noise ratio and spatial resolution in x-ray electronic imagers: is the MTF a relevant parameter? Med Phys 27:86-93
23. Salvini E, Zincone G, Fossati N (1991) Detection of small bone lesions with digital radiography using storage phosphors. Radiol Med 81:705-708
24. Braunschweig R, Rether J, Niemeier R, et al (1994) Use of digital photoluminescence radiography in traumatology. Report of experiences. Unfallchirurg 97:337-342
25. Jonsson A, Borg A, Hannesson P, et al (1994) Film-screen vs. digital radiography in rheumatoid arthritis of the hand. An ROC analysis. Acta Radiol 35:311-318
26. Phillips JH, Albregts AE, Kling TF Jr, et al (1994) Digital radiography in pediatric orthopaedics: a prospective, controlled, and randomized trial. J Pediatr Orthop 14:377-380
27. Langen HJ, Klein HM, Wein B, et al (1993) Comparative evaluation of digital radiography versus conventional radiography of fractured skulls. Invest Radiol 28:686-689
28. Zähringer M, Krug B, Kamm KF, et al (2001) Detection of porcine bone lesions and fissures: comparing digital selenium, digital luminescence, and analog film-screen radiography. AJR 177:1397-1403
29. Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D'Orsi CJ, et al (2001) Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations. Radiology 218:873-880