Effects of dual-energy subtraction chest radiography on detection of small pulmonary nodules with varying attenuation: Receiver operating characteristic analysis using a phantom study

Japanese Journal of Radiology

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 214-219

  Oda, Seitaro ^a   Awai, Kazuo ^a   Funama, Yoshinori ^b   Utsunomiya, Daisuke ^a   Yanaga, Yumi ^a   Kawanaka, Koichi ^a   Yamashita, Yasuyuki ^a  

^a KUMAMOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b KUMAMOTO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Chest radiography; Dual energy subtraction; Flat panel detector; Phantom; ROC analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DUAL ENERGY SUBTRACTION CHEST RADIOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; LUNG NODULE; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

HUMANS; LUNG; LUNG NEOPLASMS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIOGRAPHY, DUAL-ENERGY SCANNED PROJECTION; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE;

EID: 77954619615     PISSN: 18671071     EISSN: 1867108X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11604-009-0411-7     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Kaneko M, Eguchi K, Ohmatsu H, Kakinuma R, Naruke T, Suemasu K, et al. Peripheral lung cancer: screening and detection with low-dose spiral CT versus radiography. Radiology 1996;201:798-802.
2. Quekel LG, Kessels AG, Goei R, van Engelshoven JM. Miss rate of lung cancer on the chest radiograph in clinical practice. Chest 1999;115:720-4.
3. Woodring JH. Pitfalls in the radiologic diagnosis of lung cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990;154:1165-75.
4. Tsubamoto M, Kuriyama K, Kido S, Arisawa J, Kohno N, Johkoh T, et al. Detection of lung cancer on chest radiographs: analysis on the basis of size and extent of ground-glass opacity at thin-section CT. Radiology 2002;224:139-44.
5. Shah PK, Austin JH, White CS, Patel P, Haramati LB, Pearson GD, et al. Missed non-small cell lung cancer: radiographic findings of potentially resectable lesions evident only in retrospect. Radiology 2003;226:235-41.
6. Ide K, Mogami H, Murakami T, Yasuhara Y, Miyagawa M, Mochizuki T. Detection of lung cancer using single-exposure dual-energy subtraction chest radiography. Radiat Med 2007;25:195-201.
7. Uemura M, Miyagawa M, Yasuhara Y, Murakami T, Ikra H, Sakamoto K, et al. Clinical evaluation of pulmonary nodules with dual-exposure dual-energy subtraction chest radiography. Radiat Med 2005;23:391-7.
8. Bacher K, Smeets P, Bonnarens K, De Hauwere A, Verstraete K, Thierens H. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional fi lm-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:923-9.
9. International Atomic Energy Agency. International basic safety standards for protection against ionizing radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. IAEA safety series no. 115. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1996..
10. Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH. Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data. Stat Med 1998;17:1033-53.
11. Shiraishi J, Katsuragawa S, Ikezoe J, Matsumoto T, Kobayashi T, Komatsu K, et al. Development of a digital image database for chest radiographs with and without a lung nodule: receiver operating characteristic analysis of radiologists' detection of pulmonary nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:71-4.
12. Kelcz F, Zink FE, Peppler WW, Kruger DG, Ergun DL, Mistretta CA. Conventional chest radiography vs dual-energy computed radiography in the detection and characterization of pulmonary nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994;162: 271-8.
13. Tagashira H, Arakawa K, Yoshimoto M, Mochizuki T, Murase K. Detectability of lung nodules using flat panel detector with dual energy subtraction by two shot method: evaluation by ROC method. Eur J Radiol 2007;64:279-4.
14. Ricke J, Fischbach F, Freund T, Teichgräber U, Hänninen EL, Röttgen R, et al. Clinical results of CsI-detector-based dual-exposure dual energy in chest radiography. Eur Radiol 2003;13:2577-2.
15. Rühl R, Wozniak MM, Werk M, Laurent F, Mager G, Montaudon M, et al. CsI-detector-based dual-exposure dual energy in chest radiography for lung nodule detection: results of an international multicenter trial. Eur Radiol 2008;18: 1831-9.
16. Oda S, Awai K, Liu D, Nakaura T, Yanaga Y, Nomori H, et al. Ground-glass opacities on thin-section helical CT: differentiation between bronchioloalveolar carcinoma and atypical adenomatous hyperplasia. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190: 1363-8.
17. Floyd CE Jr, Warp RJ, Dobbins JT 3rd, Chotas HG, Baydush AH, Vargas-Voracek R, et al. Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography. Radiology 2001;218:683-688.
18. Hamer OW, Volk M, Zorger Z, Feuerbach S, Strotzer M. Amorphous silicon, flat-panel, X-ray detector versus storage phosphor-based computed radiography: contrast-detail phantom study at different tube voltages and detector entrance doses. Invest Radiol 2003;38:212-20.
19. Kido S, Ikezoe J, Naito H, Tamura S, Kozuka T, Ito W, et al. Single-exposure dual-energy chest images with computed radiography: evaluation with simulated pulmonary nodules. Invest Radiol 1993;28:482-7.
20. Kido S, Ikezoe J, Naito H, Arisawa J, Tamura S, Kozuka T, et al. Clinical evaluation of pulmonary nodules with singleexposure dual-energy subtraction chest radiography with an iterative noise-reduction algorithm. Radiology 1995;194: 407-12.