AJR ARRS PQI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goo, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Goo, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2000; 175:1013-1018
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Digital Chest Radiography with a Selenium-Based Flat-Panel Detector Versus a Storage Phosphor System

Comparison of Soft-Copy Images

Jin Mo Goo1, Jung-Gi Im1, Jong Hyo Kim1, Joon Beom Seo2, Tae Sung Kim3, Sang June Shine1 and Whal Lee1

1 Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine and Institute of Radiation Medicine, SNUMRC, 28, Yongon-dong, Chongro-gu, Seoul 110-744, Korea.
2 Department of Radiology, Gil Medical Center, Gachon Medical School, 1198, Kuwol-dong, Nambdong-gu, Inchon 405-220, Korea.
3 Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, College of Medicine, Sungkyunswan University, 50, Ilwon-Dong, Kangnam-Ku, Seoul 135-710, Korea.

OBJECTIVE. We compared the soft-copy images produced by a digital chest radiography system that uses a flat-panel X-ray detector based on amorphous selenium with images produced by a storage phosphor radiography system for the visualization of anatomic regions of the chest.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two chest radiologists and two residents analyzed 46 pairs of posteroanterior chest radiographs on high-resolution video monitors (2560 x 2048 x 8 bits). In each pair, one radiograph was obtained with a storage phosphor radiography system, and the other radiograph was obtained with a selenium-based flat-panel detector radiography system. Each pair of radiographs was obtained at the same exposure settings. The interpreter rated the visibility and radiographic quality of 11 different anatomic regions. Each pair of images was ranked on a five-point scale (1 = prefer image A, 3 = no preference, 5 = prefer image B) for preference of technique. Statistical significance of preference was determined using the Wilcoxon's signed rank test.

RESULTS. The interpreters had a statistically significant preference for the selenium-based radiography system in six (unobscured lung, hilum, rib, minor fissure, heart border, and overall appearance) of 11 anatomic regions (p < 0.001) and for the storage phosphor system in two regions (proximal airway and thoracic spine) (p < 0.05). Chest radiologists strongly preferred selenium-based images in eight regions, and they did not prefer storage phosphor images in any region.

CONCLUSION. The soft-copy images produced by the selenium-based radiography system were perceived as equal or superior to those produced by the storage phosphor system in most but not all anatomic regions.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
E. A. Krupinski, G. J. Becker, D. Laszakovits, A. M. Gerdeman, and M. G. Evanoff
Evaluation of Off-the-Shelf Displays for Use in the American Board of Radiology Maintenance of Certification Examination
Radiology, March 1, 2009; 250(3): 658 - 664.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. Wirth, M. Treitl, M. F. Reiser, and M. Korner
Imaging Performance with Different Doses in Skeletal Radiography: Comparison of a Needle-structured and a Conventional Storage Phosphor System with a Flat-Panel Detector
Radiology, January 1, 2009; 250(1): 152 - 160.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
M. Korner, C. H. Weber, S. Wirth, K.-J. Pfeifer, M. F. Reiser, and M. Treitl
Advances in Digital Radiography: Physical Principles and System Overview
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2007; 27(3): 675 - 686.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Don, B. R. Whiting, J. S. Ellinwood, D. H. Foos, K. A. Kronemer, and R. A. Kraus
Neonatal Chest Computed Radiography: Image Processing and Optimal Image Display
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2007; 188(4): 1138 - 1144.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. Bacher, P. Smeets, L. Vereecken, A. De Hauwere, P. Duyck, R. De Man, K. Verstraete, and H. Thierens
Image quality and radiation dose on digital chest imaging: comparison of amorphous silicon and amorphous selenium flat-panel systems.
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2006; 187(3): 630 - 637.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Radiat Prot DosimetryHome page
V. Neofotistou, V. Tsapaki, S. Kottou, A. Schreiner-Karoussou, and E. Vano
Does digital imaging decrease patient dose? A pilot study and review of the literature
Radiat Prot Dosimetry, December 1, 2005; 117(1-3): 204 - 210.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
O. W. Hamer, C. B. Sirlin, M. Strotzer, I. Borisch, N. Zorger, S. Feuerbach, and M. Volk
Chest Radiography with a Flat-Panel Detector: Image Quality with Dose Reduction after Copper Filtration
Radiology, November 1, 2005; 237(2): 691 - 700.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
L. J. M. Kroft, W. J. H. Veldkamp, B. J. A. Mertens, M. V. Boot, and J. Geleijns
Comparison of Eight Different Digital Chest Radiography Systems: Variation in Detection of Simulated Chest Disease
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2005; 185(2): 339 - 346.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. M. Goo, J.-Y. Choi, J.-G. Im, H. J. Lee, M. J. Chung, D. Han, S. H. Park, J. H. Kim, and S.-H. Nam
Effect of Monitor Luminance and Ambient Light on Observer Performance in Soft-Copy Reading of Digital Chest Radiographs
Radiology, September 1, 2004; 232(3): 762 - 766.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. Ganten, B. Radeleff, A. Kampschulte, M. D. Daniels, G. W. Kauffmann, and J. Hansmann
Comparing Image Quality of Flat-Panel Chest Radiography with Storage Phosphor Radiography and Film-Screen Radiography
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2003; 181(1): 171 - 176.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. M. Goo, J.-G. Im, H. J. Lee, M. J. Chung, J. B. Seo, H. Y. Kim, Y.-J. Lee, J.-W. Kang, and J. H. Kim
Detection of Simulated Chest Lesions by Using Soft-Copy Reading: Comparison of an Amorphous Silicon Flat-Panel-Detector System and a Storage-Phosphor System
Radiology, July 1, 2002; 224(1): 242 - 246.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
T. S. Kim, J.-G. Im, J. M. Goo, K. H. Lee, Y.-J. Lee, S. H. Kim, and S. Kim
Detection of Pulmonary Edema in Pigs: Storage Phosphor versus Amorphous Selenium-based Flat-Panel-Detector Radiography
Radiology, June 1, 2002; 223(3): 695 - 701.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. Fink, P. J. Hallscheidt, G. Noeldge, A. Kampschulte, B. Radeleff, W. P. Hosch, G. W. Kauffmann, and J. Hansmann
Clinical Comparative Study with a Large-Area Amorphous Silicon Flat-Panel Detector: Image Quality and Visibility of Anatomic Structures on Chest Radiography
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2002; 178(2): 481 - 486.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
A. Y. Kim, K. S. Cho, K.-S. Song, J. H. Kim, J.-G. Kim, and H. K. Ha
Urinary Calculi on Computed Radiography: Comparison of Observer Performance with Hard-Copy Versus Soft-Copy Images on Different Viewer Systems
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2001; 177(2): 331 - 335.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.