Routine skeleton radiography using a flat-panel detector: Image quality and clinical acceptance at 50% dose reduction

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 230-235

  Völk, Markus ^a   Paetzel, Christian ^a   Angele, Peter ^a   Seitz, Johannes ^a   Füchtmeier, Bernd ^a   Hente, Reiner ^a   Feuerbach, Stefan ^a   Strotzer, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL REGENSBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bones; Digital; Dose; Flat panel detector; Image quality; Radiography; Reduction

Indexed keywords

CESIUM; IODIDE; SILICON; THALLIUM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CHILD; DEVICE; DOSE RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SKELETON RADIOGRAPHY;

EID: 0346665619     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004424-200304000-00007     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Völk M, Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, et al. Flat-panel X-ray detector using amorphous silicon technology: reduced radiation dose for the detection of foreign bodies. Invest Radiol 1997;32:373-377.
2. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Spahn M, et al. Amorphous silicon (a-Si), flat-panel, X-ray detector versus screen-film radiography: effect of dose reduction on the detectability of cortical bone defects and fractures. Invest Radiol 1998;33:33-38.
3. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Völk M, et al. Detection of simulated chest lesions with reduced radiation dose: comparison of conventional screen-film radiography and a flat-panel X-ray detector based on amorphous silicon (a-Si). Invest Radiol 1998;33:98-103.
4. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Völk M, et al. Clinical application of a flat-panel X-ray detector based on amorphous silicon technology: image quality and potential for dose reduction in skeletal radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:23-27.
5. Völk M, Strotzer M, Holzknecht N, et al. Digital radiography of the skeleton using a large-area detector based on amorphous silicon technology: image quality and potential for dose reduction in comparison with screen-film radiography. Clin Radiol 2000;55:615-621.
6. Strotzer M, Völk M, Wild T, et al. Simulated bone erosions in a hand phantom: detection with conventional screen-film technology versus cesium iodide-amorphous silicon flat-panel detector. Radiology 2000;215:512-515.
7. Reissberg S, Hoeschen C, Kastner A, et al. First clinical experience with a full-size, flat-panel detector for imaging the peripheral skeletal system. Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 2001;173:1048-1052.
8. Ludwig K, Lenzen H, Kamm KF, et al. Performance of a flat-panel detector in the detection of artificial bone lesions: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography. Radiology 2002;222:453-459.
9. Woodard PK, Slone RM, Gierada DS, et al. Chest radiography: depiction of normal anatomy and pathologic structures with seleniumbased digital radiography versus conventional screen-film radiography. Radiology 1997;203:197-201.
10. van Heesewijk HPM, Neitzel U, van der Graaf Y, et al. 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.
11. Floyd CE, Baker JA, Chotas HG, et al. Selenium-based digital radiography of the chest: radiologists' preference compared with filmscreen radiographs. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995;165:1353-1358.
12. Swee RG, Gray JE, Beabout JW, et al. Screen-film versus computed radiography imaging of the hand: a direct comparison. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:539-542.
13. Hamers S, Freyschmidt J, Neitzel U. Digital radiography with a large-scale electronic flat-panel detector vs screen-film radiography: observer preference in clinical skeletal diagnostics. Eur Radiol 2001;11:1753-1759.
14. Peer S, Neitzel U, Giacomuzzi SM, et al. Direct digital radiography versus storage phosphor radiography in detection of wrist fractures. Clin Radiol 2002;57:258-262.
15. Okamura T, Tanaka S, Koyama N, et al. Clinical evaluation of digital radiography based on a large-area cesium iodide-amorphous silicon flat-panel detector compared with screen-film radiography for skeletal system and abdomen. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1741-1747.
16. Fischbach F, Ricke J, Freund T, et al. Flat panel digital radiography compared with storage phosphor computed radiography: assessment of dose versus image quality in phantom studies. Invest Radiol 2002;37:609-614.
17. Lewentat G, Bohndorf K. Analysis of reject x-ray films as quality assurance element in diagnostic radiology. Fortschr Rontgenstr 1997;166:376-381.
18. Strotzer M, Völk M, Fründ R. et al. Routine chest radiography with a flat-panel detector: image quality with standard detector dose and 33% dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;178:169-171.