Cargando…

Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems

The aim of this study was to determine the quantitative image quality metrics of the low-dose 2D/3D EOS slot scanner X-ray imaging system (LDSS) compared with conventional digital radiography (DR) X-ray imaging systems. The effective detective quantum efficiency (eDQE) and effective noise quantum eq...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abdi, Ahmed Jibril, Mussmann, Bo R., Mackenzie, Alistair, Gerke, Oke, Klaerke, Benedikte, Andersen, Poul Erik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8472127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34574041
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091699
_version_ 1784574648930795520
author Abdi, Ahmed Jibril
Mussmann, Bo R.
Mackenzie, Alistair
Gerke, Oke
Klaerke, Benedikte
Andersen, Poul Erik
author_facet Abdi, Ahmed Jibril
Mussmann, Bo R.
Mackenzie, Alistair
Gerke, Oke
Klaerke, Benedikte
Andersen, Poul Erik
author_sort Abdi, Ahmed Jibril
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to determine the quantitative image quality metrics of the low-dose 2D/3D EOS slot scanner X-ray imaging system (LDSS) compared with conventional digital radiography (DR) X-ray imaging systems. The effective detective quantum efficiency (eDQE) and effective noise quantum equivalent (eNEQ) were measured using chest and knee protocols. Methods: A Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends (NEXT) of a chest adult phantom and a PolyMethylmethacrylate (PMMA) phantom were used for the chest and knee protocols, respectively. Quantitative image quality metrics, including effective normalised noise power spectrum (eNNPS), effective modulation transfer function (eMTF), eDQE and eNEQ of the LDSS and DR imaging systems were assessed and compared. Results: In the chest acquisition, the LDSS imaging system achieved significantly higher eNEQ and eDQE than the DR imaging systems at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.001 ≤ p ≤ 0.044). For the knee acquisition, the LDSS imaging system also achieved significantly higher eNEQ and eDQE than the DR imaging systems at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.001 ≤ p ≤ 0.002). However, there was no significant difference in eNEQ and eDQE between DR systems 1 and 2 at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.10 < p < 1.00) for either chest or knee protocols. Conclusion: The LDSS imaging system performed well compared to the DR systems. Thus, we have demonstrated that the LDSS imaging system has the potential to be used for clinical diagnostic purposes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8472127
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84721272021-09-28 Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems Abdi, Ahmed Jibril Mussmann, Bo R. Mackenzie, Alistair Gerke, Oke Klaerke, Benedikte Andersen, Poul Erik Diagnostics (Basel) Article The aim of this study was to determine the quantitative image quality metrics of the low-dose 2D/3D EOS slot scanner X-ray imaging system (LDSS) compared with conventional digital radiography (DR) X-ray imaging systems. The effective detective quantum efficiency (eDQE) and effective noise quantum equivalent (eNEQ) were measured using chest and knee protocols. Methods: A Nationwide Evaluation of X-ray Trends (NEXT) of a chest adult phantom and a PolyMethylmethacrylate (PMMA) phantom were used for the chest and knee protocols, respectively. Quantitative image quality metrics, including effective normalised noise power spectrum (eNNPS), effective modulation transfer function (eMTF), eDQE and eNEQ of the LDSS and DR imaging systems were assessed and compared. Results: In the chest acquisition, the LDSS imaging system achieved significantly higher eNEQ and eDQE than the DR imaging systems at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.001 ≤ p ≤ 0.044). For the knee acquisition, the LDSS imaging system also achieved significantly higher eNEQ and eDQE than the DR imaging systems at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.001 ≤ p ≤ 0.002). However, there was no significant difference in eNEQ and eDQE between DR systems 1 and 2 at lower and higher spatial frequencies (0.10 < p < 1.00) for either chest or knee protocols. Conclusion: The LDSS imaging system performed well compared to the DR systems. Thus, we have demonstrated that the LDSS imaging system has the potential to be used for clinical diagnostic purposes. MDPI 2021-09-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8472127/ /pubmed/34574041 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091699 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Abdi, Ahmed Jibril
Mussmann, Bo R.
Mackenzie, Alistair
Gerke, Oke
Klaerke, Benedikte
Andersen, Poul Erik
Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems
title Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems
title_full Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems
title_fullStr Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems
title_full_unstemmed Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems
title_short Quantitative Image Quality Metrics of the Low-Dose 2D/3D Slot Scanner Compared to Two Conventional Digital Radiography X-ray Imaging Systems
title_sort quantitative image quality metrics of the low-dose 2d/3d slot scanner compared to two conventional digital radiography x-ray imaging systems
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8472127/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34574041
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091699
work_keys_str_mv AT abdiahmedjibril quantitativeimagequalitymetricsofthelowdose2d3dslotscannercomparedtotwoconventionaldigitalradiographyxrayimagingsystems
AT mussmannbor quantitativeimagequalitymetricsofthelowdose2d3dslotscannercomparedtotwoconventionaldigitalradiographyxrayimagingsystems
AT mackenziealistair quantitativeimagequalitymetricsofthelowdose2d3dslotscannercomparedtotwoconventionaldigitalradiographyxrayimagingsystems
AT gerkeoke quantitativeimagequalitymetricsofthelowdose2d3dslotscannercomparedtotwoconventionaldigitalradiographyxrayimagingsystems
AT klaerkebenedikte quantitativeimagequalitymetricsofthelowdose2d3dslotscannercomparedtotwoconventionaldigitalradiographyxrayimagingsystems
AT andersenpoulerik quantitativeimagequalitymetricsofthelowdose2d3dslotscannercomparedtotwoconventionaldigitalradiographyxrayimagingsystems