Digital Chest Radiography: an Update on Modern Technology, Dose Containment and Control of Image Quality

Overview

Journal Eur Radiol

Specialty Radiology

Date 2008 Apr 24

PMID 18431577

Citations 47

Authors

Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop

Ulrich Neitzel

Henk W Venema

Martin Uffmann

Mathias Prokop

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The introduction of digital radiography not only has revolutionized communication between radiologists and clinicians, but also has improved image quality and allowed for further reduction of patient exposure. However, digital radiography also poses risks, such as unnoticed increases in patient dose and suboptimum image processing that may lead to suppression of diagnostic information. Advanced processing techniques, such as temporal subtraction, dual-energy subtraction and computer-aided detection (CAD) will play an increasing role in the future and are all targeted to decrease the influence of distracting anatomic background structures and to ease the detection of focal and subtle lesions. This review summarizes the most recent technical developments with regard to new detector techniques, options for dose reduction and optimized image processing. It explains the meaning of the exposure indicator or the dose reference level as tools for the radiologist to control the dose. It also provides an overview over the multitude of studies conducted in recent years to evaluate the options of these new developments to realize the principle of ALARA. The focus of the review is hereby on adult applications, the relationship between dose and image quality and the differences between the various detector systems.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of X-ray Beam Collimation in Adult Chest Radiography.

Aloufi K, Gameraddin M, Albdrani A, Alsani M, Alshoabi S Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e68489.

PMID: 39364522 PMC: 11448963. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.68489.

Automated Quality Control Solution for Radiographic Imaging of Lung Diseases.

Kleefeld C, Castillo Lopez J, Costa P, Fitton I, Mohamed A, Pesznyak C J Clin Med. 2024; 13(16).

PMID: 39201109 PMC: 11355187. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13164967.

Performance of artificial intelligence-based software for the automatic detection of lung lesions on chest radiographs of patients with suspected lung cancer.

Takamatsu A, Ueno M, Yoshida K, Kobayashi T, Kobayashi S, Gabata T Jpn J Radiol. 2023; 42(3):291-299.

PMID: 38032419 PMC: 10899395. DOI: 10.1007/s11604-023-01503-1.

Pulmonary abnormality screening on chest x-rays from different machine specifications: a generalized AI-based image manipulation pipeline.

Shin H, Kim T, Park J, Raj H, Jabbar M, Abebaw Z Eur Radiol Exp. 2023; 7(1):68.

PMID: 37940797 PMC: 10632317. DOI: 10.1186/s41747-023-00386-1.

The effect of breast shielding outside the field of view on breast entrance surface dose in axial X-ray examinations: a phantom study.

Hurley L, Alashban Y, Albeshan S, England A, McEntee M Diagn Interv Radiol. 2023; 29(3):555-560.

PMID: 37129301 PMC: 10679606. DOI: 10.4274/dir.2023.232126.

References

Bankier A, Schaefer-Prokop C, De Maertelaer V, Tack D, Jaksch P, Klepetko W . Air trapping: comparison of standard-dose and simulated low-dose thin-section CT techniques. Radiology. 2007; 242(3):898-906. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2423060196. View

Honey I, MacKenzie A, Evans D . Investigation of optimum energies for chest imaging using film-screen and computed radiography. Br J Radiol. 2005; 78(929):422-7. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/32912696. View

Sund P, Bath M, Kheddache S, Mansson L . Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography. Eur Radiol. 2003; 14(1):48-58. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-003-1971-z. View

Schuncke A, Neitzel U . Retrospective patient dose analysis of a digital radiography system in routine clinical use. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005; 114(1-3):131-4. DOI: 10.1093/rpd/nch535. View

Uffmann M, Neitzel U, Prokop M, Kabalan N, Weber M, Herold C . Flat-panel-detector chest radiography: effect of tube voltage on image quality. Radiology. 2005; 235(2):642-50. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2352031730. View

Korner M, Wirth S, Treitl M, Reiser M, Pfeifer K . Initial clinical results with a new needle screen storage phosphor system in chest radiograms. Rofo. 2005; 177(11):1491-6. DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-858687. View

Tack D, De Maertelaer V, Petit W, Scillia P, Muller P, Suess C . Multi-detector row CT pulmonary angiography: comparison of standard-dose and simulated low-dose techniques. Radiology. 2005; 236(1):318-25. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2361040190. View

Kakeda S, Moriya J, Sato H, Aoki T, Watanabe H, Nakata H . Improved detection of lung nodules on chest radiographs using a commercial computer-aided diagnosis system. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 182(2):505-10. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.182.2.1820505. View

Korner M, Treitl M, Schaetzing R, Pfeifer K, Reiser M, Wirth S . Depiction of low-contrast detail in digital radiography: comparison of powder- and needle-structured storage phosphor systems. Invest Radiol. 2006; 41(7):593-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000223765.73182.55. View

10.

. Radiological protection and safety in medicine. A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP. 1996; 26(2):1-47. View

11.

Uffmann M, Prokop M, Eisenhuber E, Fuchsjager M, Weber M, Schaefer-Prokop C . Computed radiography and direct radiography: influence of acquisition dose on the detection of simulated lung lesions. Invest Radiol. 2005; 40(5):249-56. DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000159875.01324.bf. View

12.

. Managing patient dose in digital radiology. A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP. 2004; 34(1):1-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.icrp.2004.02.001. View

13.

Uemura M, Miyagawa M, Yasuhara Y, Murakami T, Ikura H, Sakamoto K . Clinical evaluation of pulmonary nodules with dual-exposure dual-energy subtraction chest radiography. Radiat Med. 2006; 23(6):391-7. View

14.

Kobayashi T, Xu X, Macmahon H, Metz C, Doi K . Effect of a computer-aided diagnosis scheme on radiologists' performance in detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Radiology. 1996; 199(3):843-8. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.199.3.8638015. View

15.

Launders J, Cowen A . A comparison of the threshold detail detectability of a screen-film combination and computed radiology under conditions relevant to high-kVp chest radiography. Phys Med Biol. 1995; 40(8):1393-8. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/40/8/008. View

16.

Weatherburn G, Bryan S, Davies J . Comparison of doses for bedside examinations of the chest with conventional screen-film and computed radiography: results of a randomized controlled trial. Radiology. 2000; 217(3):707-12. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.217.3.r00dc12707. View

17.

Stahl M, Aach T, Dippel S . Digital radiography enhancement by nonlinear multiscale processing. Med Phys. 2000; 27(1):56-65. DOI: 10.1118/1.598857. View

18.

Leblans P, Struye L, Willems P . A new needle-crystalline computed radiography detector. J Digit Imaging. 2000; 13(2 Suppl 1):117-20. PMC: 3453297. DOI: 10.1007/BF03167640. View

19.

Willis C . Computed radiography: a higher dose?. Pediatr Radiol. 2002; 32(10):745-50; discussion 751-4. DOI: 10.1007/s00247-002-0804-6. View

20.

Flynn M, Samei E . Experimental comparison of noise and resolution for 2k and 4k storage phosphor radiography systems. Med Phys. 1999; 26(8):1612-23. DOI: 10.1118/1.598656. View