Reducing dose in urography while maintaining image quality - A comparison of storage phosphor plates and a flat-panel detector

European Radiology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 221-226

  Jansson, Margareta ^a   Geijer, Håkan ^a   Persliden, Jan ^a,b   Andersson, Torbjörn ^a  

^a ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Digital radiography; Flat panel detector; Image quality; Phantoms

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLADDER TUMOR; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DOSE REDUCTION; EUROPE; FEMALE; HEMATURIA; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAVENOUS UROGRAPHY; MALE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE HYPERTROPHY; RADIATION DETECTOR; RADIATION DOSE; RECURRENT INFECTION; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; UROLITHIASIS;

AGED; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; BRAIN; COGNITION DISORDERS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 30844447448     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-005-2772-3     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Peters SE, Brennan PC (2002) Digital radiography: Are the manufacturers' settings too high? Optimisation of the Kodak digital radiography system with aid of the computed radiography dose index. Eur Radiol 12:2381-2387 12195499
2. Thijssen MAO, Bijkerk KR, van der Burght RJM (1998) Manual CDRAD-phantom type 2.0. Project Quality Assurance in Radiology, Section Clinical Physics. Department of Radiology. University Hospital Nijmegen, St. Radboud, The Netherlands
3. MAO Thijssen HOM Thijssen JL Merx JM Lindeijer KR Bijkerk 1989 A definition of image quality: The image quality figure in: BM Moores BF Wall H Eriskat H Schibilla (eds) BIR Report 20: Optimization of image quality and patient exposure in diagnostic radiology The British Institute of Radiology London pp. 29-34
4. Månsson LG (2000) Methods for the evaluation of image quality: A review. Radiat Prot Dosim 90:89-99
5. Commission of the European Communities 1996 European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images, EUR 16260 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities Luxembourg
6. Geijer H, Beckman K-W, Andersson T, Persliden J (2001) Image quality vs radiation dose for a flat-panel amorphous silicon detector: A phantom study. Eur Radiol 11:1704-1709 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3Mvms1Crtg%3D%3D
7. Zähringer M, Hesselmann V, Schulte O, Kamm KF, Braun W, Haupt G, Krug B, Lackner K (2003) Reducing the radiation dose during excretory urography: Flat-panel silicon X-ray detector versus computed radiography. Am J Roentgenol 181:931-937
8. Okamura T, Tanaka S, Koyama K, Norihumi N, Daikokuya H, Matsuoka T, Kishimoto K, Hatagawa M, Kudoh H, Yamada R (2002) 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 12:1741-1747 12111065
9. Zähringer M, Kamm KF, Krug B, Braun W, Coburger S, Winnekendonk G, Krüger K, Haupt G, Lackner K (2002) Vergleich der digitalen Flachdetektorradiographie mit der digitalen Lumineszenzradiographie bei Urogrammen. Röfo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 174:625-630 11997864
10. Yaffe MJ, Rowlands JA (1997) X-ray detectors for digital radiography. Phys Med Biol 42:1-39 1:STN:280:ByiC28fhvV0%3D
11. Völk M, Hamer OW, Feuerbach S, Strotzer M (2004) Dose reduction in skeletal and chest radiography using a large-area flat-panel detector based on amorphous silicon and thallium-doped cesium iodide: Technical background, basic image quality parameters, and review of the literature. Eur Radiol 14:827-834 14968260
12. Norrman E, Gårdestig M, Geijer H, Persliden J (2004) A clinical evaluation of the image quality computer program CCIF. Society for Computer Applications in Radiology, Annual Meeting, SCAR 2004