DQE of direct and indirect digital radiographic systems

被引:53
作者
Samei, E [1 ]
Flynn, MJ [1 ]
Chotas, HG [1 ]
Dobbins, JT [1 ]
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Durham, NC 27710 USA
来源
MEDICAL IMAGING 2001: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING | 2001年 / 4320卷
关键词
image quality; resolution; modulation transfer function; MTF; noise; noise power spectrum; NPS; detective quantum efficiency; DQE; digital radiography;
D O I
10.1117/12.430953
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Current flat-panel detectors either directly convert x-ray energy to electronic charge or use indirect conversion with an intermediate optical process. The purpose of this work was to compare direct and indirect detectors in terms of their modulation transfer function (MTF), noise power spectrum (NPS), and detective quantum efficiency (DQE). Measurements were made on three flat-panel detectors, Philips Digital Diagnost, GE Revolution XQ/i, and Hologic Direct-Ray DR1000 using the IEC-defined RQA5 (similar to 75 kVp, 21 min Al) and RQA9 (similar to 120 kVp, 40 min Al) radiographic techniques. The presampled MTT of the systems was measured using an edge method (Samei et al., Med Phys 25:102, 1998). The NPS of the systems was determined for a range of exposure levels by 2D Fourier analysis of uniformly exposed radiographs (Flynn and Samei, Med Phys 26:1612, 1999). The ideal signal-to-noise ratio per exposure for each system was estimated using a semiempirical x-ray model. The DQE, reported only at the RQA5 technique, was assessed from the measured MTF, NPS, exposure, and the ideal signal-to-noise ratio. For the direct system, the MTF was found to be significantly higher than that for the indirect systems and very close to an ideal function associated with the detector pixel size. The MPS for the direct system was found to be constant in relation to frequency. The DQE results reflected expected differences based on the absorption efficiency of the different detector materials. Using RQA5 and 0.3 mR exposure, the measured DQE values at spatial frequencies of 0.15 mm(-1) and 2.5 mm(-1) were 64% and 14% for the XQ/i system and 35% and 19% for DR-1000. Using RQA5 and the averages at all exposures, the corresponding values were 58% and 13% for the XQ/i system and 36% and 19% for DR-1000.
引用
收藏
页码:189 / 197
页数:9
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1994, 1267 IEC
[2]   Image quality evaluation of a desktop computed radiography system [J].
Fetterly, KA ;
Hangiandreou, NJ .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2000, 27 (12) :2669-2679
[3]   Imaging characteristics of an amorphous silicon flat-panel detector for digital chest radiography [J].
Floyd, CE ;
Warp, RJ ;
Dobbins, JT ;
Chotas, HG ;
Baydush, AH ;
Vargas-Voracek, R ;
Ravin, CE .
RADIOLOGY, 2001, 218 (03) :683-688
[4]   Experimental comparison of noise and resolution for 2k and 4k storage phosphor radiography systems [J].
Flynn, MJ ;
Samei, E .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1999, 26 (08) :1612-1623
[5]   Performance of a 41X41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications [J].
Granfors, PR ;
Aufrichtig, R .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2000, 27 (06) :1324-1331
[6]   DQE(f) of an amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector: Detector parameter influences and measurement methodology [J].
Granfors, PR ;
Aufrichtig, R .
MEDICAL IMAGING 2000: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2000, 3977 :2-13
[7]  
HOESCHEN D, 2001, P SPIE, V4320
[8]   Image quality evaluation of a direct digital radiography detector operating in a UK radiology department [J].
Kengyelics, SM ;
Cowen, AR ;
Davies, AG .
MEDICAL IMAGING 1999: PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, PTS 1 AND 2, 1999, 3659 :24-35
[9]   Improved imaging performance of a 14x17-inch Direct Radiography™ System using Se/TFT detector [J].
Lee, DL ;
Cheung, LK ;
Rodricks, B ;
Powell, GF .
PHYSICS OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 1998, 3336 :14-23
[10]   A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device [J].
Samei, E ;
Flynn, MJ ;
Reimann, DA .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1998, 25 (01) :102-113