Image quality is resilient against tube voltage variations in post-mortem skeletal radiography with a digital flat-panel detector.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 04 2021
08 04 2021
Historique:
received:
04
06
2020
accepted:
24
03
2021
entrez:
9
4
2021
pubmed:
10
4
2021
medline:
10
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In recent phantom studies low-contrast detectability was shown to be independent from variations in tube voltage in digital radiography (DR) systems. To investigate the transferability to a clinical setting, the lower extremities of human cadavers were exposed at constant detector doses with different tube voltages in a certain range, as proposed in the phantom studies. Three radiologists independently graded different aspects of image quality (IQ) in a comparative analysis. The grades show no correlation between IQ and kV, which means that the readers were not able to recognize a significant IQ difference at different kV. Signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios showed no significant differences in IQ despite the kV-setting variations. These findings were observed from a limited kV range setting. Higher kV-settings resulted in lowest patient exposure at constant IQ. These results confirm the potential of DR-systems to contribute to standardization of examination protocols comparable to computed tomography. This may prevent the trend to overexpose. Further investigations in other body regions and other DR-systems are encouraged to determine transferability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33833315
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-87294-9
pii: 10.1038/s41598-021-87294-9
pmc: PMC8032833
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
7701Références
Eur Radiol. 2003 Aug;13(8):1992-9
pubmed: 12942300
Br J Radiol. 2007 Sep;80(957):724-30
pubmed: 17709364
Eur J Radiol. 2009 Nov;72(2):194-201
pubmed: 19695809
Br J Radiol. 2012 Jul;85(1015):e330-8
pubmed: 21937611
Invest Radiol. 1998 Jan;33(1):33-8
pubmed: 9438507
Radiographics. 2007 May-Jun;27(3):675-86
pubmed: 17495286
J Med Radiat Sci. 2014 Sep;61(3):176-90
pubmed: 26229654
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):240-5
pubmed: 15933115
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019 Oct;17(10):2165-2173
pubmed: 31305289
Clin Radiol. 2008 May;63(5):487-98
pubmed: 18374710
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2010 Apr-May;139(1-3):153-8
pubmed: 20233755
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):11-25
pubmed: 15933076
J Med Radiat Sci. 2014 Jun;61(2):112-8
pubmed: 26229645
Phys Med Biol. 1997 Jan;42(1):1-39
pubmed: 9015806
Invest Radiol. 2003 Apr;38(4):212-20
pubmed: 12649645
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2005;114(1-3):286-93
pubmed: 15933123
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2015 Feb;59(1):54-65
pubmed: 25565651
Radiology. 2009 Jan;250(1):152-60
pubmed: 19001150
Invest Radiol. 2006 Jul;41(7):593-9
pubmed: 16772853
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2016 Jun;169(1-4):221-4
pubmed: 26541187
Eur J Radiol. 2009 Nov;72(2):202-8
pubmed: 19628349