Effect of x-ray tube potential on image quality and patient dose for lumbar spine computed radiography examinations

Australasian Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 216-222

  Brindhaban, A ^a   Al Khalifah, K ^a   Al Wathiqi, G ^b   Al Ostath, H ^c  

^a KUWAIT UNIVERSITY   (Kuwait)

^b MUBARAK AL KABEER HOSPITAL   (Kuwait)

^c AL AMIRI HOSPITAL   (Kuwait)

Author keywords

Image quality; Lumbar spine; Patient dose; X ray tube potential

Indexed keywords

DOSIMETRY; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGING TECHNIQUES; IONIZATION; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; X RAY TUBES;

COMPUTED RADIOGRAPHY; LUMBAR SPINE; PATIENT DOSE; X-RAY TUBE POTENTIAL;

DIAGNOSTIC RADIOGRAPHY;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSIMETRY; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; EUROPEAN UNION; GONAD DOSE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IONIZATION CHAMBER; LUMBAR SPINE; PELVIS; PHANTOM; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIODIAGNOSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; X RAY TUBE;

EID: 31844438312     PISSN: 01589938     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03178721     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Axelsson, B., Petersen, U. and Wiltz. H.J., Digital skeletal radiography: Reduction of absorbed dose by adaptation of exposure factors and image processing, Acta Radiol., 42:592-598, 2001.
2. Commission of the European Communities, European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic image, EUR 16250 EN, CEC, Brussels, 1996.
3. Dobbins, J. T., Rice, J. J., Beam, C. A. and Ravin, C. E., Threshold perception performance with computed and screen film radiography: Implications for chest radiography, Radiology, 183:179-187, 1992.
4. Freedman, M. and Steller, D., Digital radiography of the musculoskeletal system: The optimal image, J. Digit. Imaging, 8:37-42, 1995.
5. Huda, W., Slone, R. M., Belden, C. J., Williams, J. L., Cumming. W. A. and Palmer, C. K., Mottle on computed radiographs of the chest in paediatric patient, Radiology, 199:249- 252, 1996.
6. Jonsson, A., Herrlin, K., Jonsson, K., Lundin, B., Sanfridsson, J. and Pettersson, H., Radiation dose reduction in computed skeletal radiography: Effect on image quality, Acta Radiol., 37:128-133, 1996.
7. Prokop, M., Schaefer, C. M., Oestmann, J. W. and Galanski, M., Improved parameters for unsharp mask filtering of digital chest radiographs, Radiology, 187(2):521-526, 1993.
8. Seifert, H., Kubale, R., Hagen, T., Kramann, B. and Leetz, H. K., A study of dose reduction using digital luminescence radiography for lateral skull radiography, Br. J. Radiol., 69(820):311-317, 1996.
9. Bacher, K., Smeets, P., Bonnarens, K., De Hauwere, A., Verstraete, K. and Thierens, H., Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography, Am. J. Roentgenol., 181(4):923-929, 2003.
10. Fink, C., Hallscheidt, P. J., Noeldge, G., Kampschulte, A., Radeleff, B., Hosch, W. P., Kauffmann, G. W. and Hansmann, J., Clinical comparative study with large-area amorphous silicon flat panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography, Am. J. Roentgenol., 178(2):481-486, 2002.
11. Monnin, P., Gutierrez, D., Bulling, S., Lepori, D., Valley, J. F. and Verdun, F. R., Performance comparison of an active matrix flat panel imager, computed radiography system and a screen-film system for four standard radiation qualities, Med. Phys., 32(2):343-350, 2005.
12. Fung, K. K. L. and Gilboy, W. B., The effect of beam tube potential variation on gonad dose to patients during chest radiography investigated using high sensitivity LiF: Mg, Cu, P thermoluminescent dosemeters, Br. J. Radiol., 74(880):358-367, 2001.
13. Tingberg, A., Hermann, J. and Besjakov J., Evaluation of lumbar spine images with added pathology, Proc. SPIE, 3981:34, 2000.
14. Hart, D., Jones, D. G. and Wall, B. F., Normalised organ dose for medical x-ray examinations calculated using Monte Carlo techniques, NRPB-SR262, National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, Oxford, 1994.
15. International Commission on Radiological Protection, Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, (ICRP Report 60), Annals of ICRP, 21(1-3), Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1990.
16. Lu, Z. F., Nickoloff, J. C., So, J. C. and Dutta, A. K., Comparison of computed radiography and film/screen combinations using a contrast-detail phantom, J. App. Clin. Med. Phys., 4(1):91-98, 2003.
17. Hosch, W. P., Fink, C., Radeleff, B., Kampschulte, A. P., Kauffmann, G. W. and Hansmann, J., Radiation dose reduction in chest radiography using a flat-panel amorphous silicon detector, Clin. Radiol., 57(10):902-907, 2002.
18. Hart, D., Hillier, M. C. and Wall, B. F., Doses to patients from medical x-ray examinations in the UK - 2000 Review, NRPB-W-14, National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton, Oxford, 2002.