Performance of a flat-panel detector in the detection of artificial erosive changes: Comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography

European Radiology

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1316-1323

  Ludwig, Karl ^a   Henschel, Andreas ^a   Bernhardt, Thomas M ^a   Lenzen, Horst ^a   Wormanns, Dag ^a   Diederich, Stefan ^a   Heindel, Walter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Digital radiography; Flat panel detector; ROC analysis; Skeletal imaging

Indexed keywords

WATER;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BONE EROSION; BONE RADIOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; DISEASE SIMULATION; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAMMOGRAPHY; METACARPOPHALANGEAL JOINT; MONKEY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROXIMAL INTERPHALANGEAL JOINT; RADIATION ABSORPTION; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADIATION SCATTERING; RATING SCALE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REFERENCE VALUE; RHEUMATIC DISEASE; SCREENING TEST;

EID: 0038418577     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-002-1763-x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Siewerdsen JH, Antonuk LE, El-Mohri Y, Yorkston J, Huang W, Cunningham IA (1998) Signal, noise power spectrum, and detective quantum efficiency of indirect-detection flat-panel imagers for diagnostic radiology. Med Phys 25:614
2. 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
3. Spahn M, Strotzer M, Volk M et al. (2000) Digital radiography with a large-area, amorphous-silicon, flat-panel X-ray detector system. Invest Radiol 35:260
4. Floyd CE, Warp RJ, Dobbins JT et al. (2001) Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography. Radiology 218:683
5. Andriole KP, Gould RG, Luth DM (2001) Workflow comparison of DR and screen-film dedicated chest systems. Proc SPIE 4323:203
6. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser JK, Volk M, Frund R, Seitz J, Feuerbach S (1998) Detection of simulated chest lesions with normal and reduced radiation dose: comparison of conventional screen-film radiography and a flat-panel X-ray detector based on amorphous silicon. Invest Radiol 33:98
7. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Spahn M et al. (1998) Amorphous silicon, flat-panel, X-ray detector versus screen-film radiography: effect of dose reduction on the detectability of cortical bone defects and fractures. Invest Radiol 33:33
8. Strotzer M, Volk M, Wild T, Landenberg P von, Feuerbach S (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
9. Ludwig K, Lenzen H, Kamm KF et al. (2002) Performance of a flat-panel detector in detecting artificial bone lesions: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography. Radiology 222:453
10. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Volk M et al. (1998) Clinical application of a flat-panel X-ray detector based on amorphous silicon technology: image quality and potential for radiation dose reduction in skeletal radiography. Am J Roentgenol 171:23
11. Garmer M, Hennigs SP, Jager HJ et al. (2000) Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging: diagnostic performance of a large-area silicon flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study. Am J Roentgenol 174:75
12. Hamers S, Freyschmidt J, Neitzel U (2001) Digital radiography with a large-scale electronic flat-panel detector vs screen-film radiography: observer preference in clinical skeletal diagnostics. Eur Radiol 11:1753
13. Link TM, Rummeny EJ, Lenzen H, Reuter I, Roos N, Peters PE (1994) Artificial bone erosions: detection with magnification radiography versus conventional high-resolution radiography. Radiology 192:861
14. Metz C (1978) Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 8:283
15. DeLong ER, Delong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837