+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Reducing dose in urography while maintaining image quality-a comparison of storage phosphor plates and a flat-panel detector



Reducing dose in urography while maintaining image quality-a comparison of storage phosphor plates and a flat-panel detector



European Radiology 16(1): 221-226



The introduction of new flat-panel detector technology often forces us to accept too high dose levels as proposed by the manufacturers. We need a tool to compare the image quality of a new system with the accepted standard. The aim of this study was to obtain a comparable image quality for two systems-storage phosphor plates and a flat-panel system using intravenous urography (IVU) as a clinical model. The image quality figure was calculated using a contrast-detail phantom (CDRAD) for the two evaluated systems. This allowed us to set a dose for the flat-panel system that gave equivalent image quality to the storage phosphor plates. This reduced detector dose was used in an evaluation of clinical images to find out if the dose reduction from the phantom study indeed resulted in images of equal clinical image quality. The image quality was assessed using image criteria of the European guidelines for IVU with visual grading analysis. Equivalent image quality in image pairs was achieved at 30% of the dose. The CDRAD contrast-detail phantom makes it possible to find dose levels that give equal image quality using different imaging systems.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 050140953

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 15856242

DOI: 10.1007/s00330-005-2772-3


Related references

Digital thorax radiography: flat-panel detector or storage phosphor plates. Der Radiologe 43(5): 351-361, 2003

Dual-energy cardiac imaging: an image quality and dose comparison for a flat-panel detector and x-ray image intensifier. Physics in Medicine and Biology 52(1): 183-196, 2007

Reducing the radiation dose during excretory urography: flat-panel silicon x-ray detector versus computed radiography. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 181(4): 931-937, 2003

Comparison of the image quality of a storage phospor system and a flat-panel detector in feline thoracic radiography. Tierarztliche Praxis. Ausgabe K Kleintiere/Heimtiere 38(6): 355-366, 2010

Flat panel digital radiography compared with storage phosphor computed radiography: assessment of dose versus image quality in phantom studies. Investigative Radiology 37(11): 609-614, 2002

Routine chest radiography using a flat-panel detector: image quality at standard detector dose and 33% dose reduction. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 178(1): 169-171, 2002

Comparison of low-contrast detail perception on storage phosphor radiographs and digital flat panel detector images. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 20(3): 239-242, 2001

Radiation dose and image quality in diagnostic radiology. Optimization of the dose-image quality relationship with clinical experience from scoliosis radiography, coronary intervention and a flat-panel digital detector. Acta Radiologica. Supplementum 43(427): 1-43, 2002

Chest imaging with flat-panel detector at low and standard doses: comparison with storage phosphor technology in normal patients. European Radiology 12(2): 385-390, 2002

Performance of a flat-panel detector in the detection of artificial erosive changes: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography. European Radiology 13(6): 1316-1323, 2003

Comparison of image quality and radiation dose between an image-intensifier system and a newer-generation flat-panel detector system — technical phantom measurements and evaluation of clinical imaging in children. Pediatric Radiology 46(2): 286-292, 2016

Performance of a flat-panel detector in detecting artificial bone lesions: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography. Radiology 222(2): 453-459, 2002

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 250(1): 152-160, 2009

Dynamic flat panel detector versus image intensifier in cardiac imaging: dose and image quality. Physics in Medicine and Biology 50(23): 5731-5742, 2005

Digital chest radiography with a selenium-based flat-panel detector versus a storage phosphor system: comparison of soft-copy images. Ajr. American Journal of Roentgenology 175(4): 1013-1018, 2000