Fractal-feature distance analysis of contrast-detail phantom image and meaning of pseudo fractal dimension and complexity

被引:0
作者
K. Imai
M. Ikeda
Y. Enchi
T. Niimi
机构
[1] Nagoya University School of Health Sciences,Department of Radiological Technology
[2] Osaka University Hospital,Division of Radiological Technology
来源
Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine | 2009年 / 32卷
关键词
fractal analysis; fractal-feature distance; pseudo fractal dimension; complexity;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The purposes of our studies are to examine whether or not fractal-feature distance deduced from virtual volume method can simulate observer performance indices and to investigate the physical meaning of pseudo fractal dimension and complexity. Contrast-detail (C-D) phantom radiographs were obtained at various mAs values (0.5-4.0 mAs) and 140 kVp with a computed radiography system, and the reference image was acquired at 13 mAs. For all C-D images, fractal analysis was conducted using the virtual volume method that was devised with a fractional Brownian motion model. The fractal-feature distances between the considered and reference images were calculated using pseudo fractal dimension and complexity. Further, we have performed the C-D analysis in which ten radiologists participated, and compared the fractal-feature distances with the image quality figures (IQF). To clarify the physical meaning of the pseudo fractal dimension and complexity, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and standard deviation (SD) of images noise were calculated for each mAs and compared with the pseudo fractal dimension and complexity, respectively. A strong linear correlation was found between the fractal-feature distance and IQF. The pseudo fractal dimensions became large as CNR increased. Further, a linear correlation was found between the exponential complexity and image noise SD.
引用
收藏
页码:188 / 195
页数:7
相关论文
共 83 条
[1]  
Rapp-Bemhardt U(2003)Flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon versus asymmetric screen-film system: phantom study of dose reduction and depiction of simulated findings Radiology 227 484-492
[2]  
Roehl F.W.(2002)Routine chest radiography using a flat-panel detector: image quality at standard detector dose and 33% dose reduction Am. J. Roentgenol. 178 169-171
[3]  
Gibbs R.C.(1996)Effects of dose reduction on digital chest imaging using a selenium detector: a study of detecting simulated diffuse interstitial pulmonary disease Am. J. Roentgenol. 167 403-408
[4]  
Schmidl H.(2004)Dose reduction in skeletal and chest radiography using a large-area flat-panel detector based on amorphous silicon and thallium-doped cesium iodide: technical background, basic image quality parameters, and review of the literature Eur. Radiol. 14 827-834
[5]  
Krause U.W.(1993)Digital chest radiography with photostimulable storage phosphors: signal-to-noise ratio as a function of kilovoltage with matched exposure risk Radiology 186 395-398
[6]  
Bernhardt T.M.(1991)Interstitial lung disease: impact of postprocessing in digital storage phosphor imaging Radiology 178 733-738
[7]  
Strotzer M.(2004)Comparison of visual grading analysis and determination of detective quantum efficiency for evaluating system performance in digital chest radiography Eur. Radiol. 14 48-58
[8]  
Völk M.(1987)Imaging performance of a digital storage phosphor system Med. Phys. 14 744-751
[9]  
Frund R.(2000)Simulated bone erosions in a hand phantom: detection with conventional screen-film technology versus cesium iodide-amorphous silicon flat-panel detector Radiology 215 512-515
[10]  
Hamer O.(2002)Flat panel digital radiography compared with storage phosphor computed radiography: assessment of dose versus image quality in phantom studies Invest. Radiol. 37 609-614