Effects of tube potential and scatter rejection on image quality and effective dose in digital chest X-ray examination: An anthropomorphic phantom study

Radiography

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 321-325

  Shaw, D J ^a   Crawshaw, I ^b   Rimmer, S D ^a  

^a LEEDS GENERAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^b YORK HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Effective dose; Visual grading analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COLLIMATOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; DIAPHRAGM; DIGITAL IMAGING; DOSIMETRY; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; HEART; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGING PHANTOM; LUNG BLOOD VESSEL; MEDIASTINUM; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHOTON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; THORAX; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; TRACHEA; X RAY GENERATOR;

EID: 84884814558     PISSN: 10788174     EISSN: 15322831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2013.07.007     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Veldkapm W.J.H., Kroft L.J.M., Geleijns J. Dose and perceived image quality in chest radiographs. Eur J Radiol 2009, 72:209-217.
2. 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 film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography. AJR 2003, 181:923-929.
3. European guidelines on quality criteria for diagnostic radiographic images 1996, Council of European Communities, Rep EUR 16260 EN, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
4. McEntee M.F., Brennan P.C., Connor G.O. The effect of X-ray tube potential on the image quality of PA chest radiographs when using digital image acquisition devices. Radiography 2004, 10:287-292.
5. Martin C.J. Effective dose: how should it be applied to medical exposures?. Br J Radiol 2007, 639-647.
6. Geijer H., Norrman E., Persliden J. Optimizing the tube potential for lumbar spine radiography with a flat-panel digital detector. Br J Radiol 2009, 82:62-68.
7. Honey I.D., MacKenzie A., Evans D.S. Investigation of optimum energies for chest imaging using film-screen and computed radiography. Br J Radiol 2005, 78:422-427.
8. Moore C.S., Beavis A.W., Saunderson J.R. Investigation of optimum X-ray beam tube voltage and filtration for chest radiography with a computed radiography system. Br J Radiol 2008, 81:771-777.
9. Tingberg A., Sjostrom D. Optimisation of image plate radiography with respect to tube voltage. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2005, 114:286-293.
10. Rong X.J., Shaw C.C., Llu X., Lemacks X.L., Thompson S.K. Comparison of an amorphous silicon/caesium iodide flat panel digital chest radiography system with screen/film and computed radiography systems - a contrast detail phantom study. Med Phys 2001, 28:2328-2335.
11. Egbe N.O., Heaton B., Sharp P.F. Asimple phantom study of the effects of dose reduction (by kVp increment) below current dose levels on CR chest image quality. Radiography 2010, 16:327-332.
12. Sandborg M., Tingberg A., Ullman G., Dance D.R., Carlsson G.A. Comparison of clinical and physical measures of image quality in chest and pelvis computed radiography at different tube potentials. Med Phys 2006, 33(11):4169-4175.
13. Moore C.S., Avery G., Balcam S., Needler L., Swift A., Beavis A.W., et al. Use of digitally reconstructed radiograph-based computer simulation for the optimisation of chest radiographic techniques for computed radiography imaging systems. Br J Radiol 2012, 85. e630-e9.
14. Bernhardt T.M., Rapp-Bernhardt U., Hausmann T., Reichel G., Krause U.W., Doehring W. Digital selenium radiography: anti-scatter grid for chest radiography in a clinical study. Br J Radiol 2000, 73:963-968.
15. Neitzel U. Grids or air gaps for scatter reduction in digital radiography: a model calculation. Med Phys 1992, 19(2):475-481.
16. Lanhede B., Bath M., Kheddache S., Sund P., Björneld L., Widell M., et al. The influence of different technique factors on image quality of chest radiographs as evaluated by modified CEC image quality criteria. Br J Radiol 2002, 75:38-49.
17. Roberts J.A., Evans S.C., Rees M. Optimisation of imaging technique used in direct digital radiology. JRadiol Prot 2006, 26:287-299.
18. Chen B., Barnhart H., Richard S., Colsher J., Amurao M., Samei E. Quantitative CT: technique dependence of volume estimation on pulmonary nodules. Phys Med Biol 2012, 57:1335-1348.
19. Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine Report 91: recommended standards for the routine performance testing of diagnostic X-ray imaging systems 2005, Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine, York, UK.
20. Wall B.F. Quality control of dose area product meters 1989, British Institute of Radiology Report 18: Technical and Physical Parameters for Quality Assurance in Medical Diagnostic Radiology, British Institute of Radiology, London, UK.
21. Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority PCXMC dose calculations, version 2.0.1 2008, Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Helsinki, Finland.
22. International Commission on Radiological Protection The 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection 2007, ICRP Publication 103 Ann. ICRP 37(2-4), Elsevier, Oxford.
23. AAPM assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems 2005, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, Maryland, USA.
24. Smedby Ö., Fredrikson M. Visual grading regression: analysing data from visual grading experiments with regression models. Br J Radiol 2010, 83:767-775.