대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학 (Journal of radiological science and technology)

  • 제41권5호
  • /
  • Pages.457-462
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2288-3509(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-1168(eISSN)
대한방사선과학회 (Korean Society of Radiological Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

간접평판형 검출기에서 국제전자기술위원회 기준을 통한 잡음전력스펙트럼 비교 연구

Comparison of Noise Power Spectrum in Measurements by Using International Electro-technical Commission Standard Devices in Indirect Digital Radiography

  • Min, Jung-Whan (Department of Radiological technology, Shingu University) ;
  • Jeong, Hoi-Woun (Department of Radiological Science, Baekseok Culture University) ;
  • Kim, Ki-Won (Department of Radiology, Hanil General Hospital) ;
  • Kwon, Kyung-Tae (Department of Radiological Science, The Dongnam University) ;
  • Jung, Jae-Yong (Department of Radiation Oncology, Sanggye Paik Hospital) ;
  • Son, Jin-Hyun (Department of Radiological technology, Shingu University) ;
  • Kim, Hyun-Soo (Department of Radiological technology, Shingu University)
  • 투고 : 2018.08.09
  • 심사 : 2018.10.23
  • 발행 : 2018.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The purpose of this study was to compare image quality of indirect digital radiography (IDR) system using the International Electro-technical Commission standard (IEC 62220-1), and to suggest the analysis of noise power spectrum (NPS) which were applied to IEC 62220-1 in medical imaging. In this study, Pixium 4600 (Trixell, France) which is indirect flat panel detector (FPD) was used. The size of image receptor (IR) is $7{\times}17$ inch (matrix $3001{\times}3001$) which performed 14bit processing and pixel pitch is $143{\mu}m$. In IEC standard, NPS evaluation were applied to RQA3, RQA5, RQA7 and RQA9. Because of different radiation quality, each region of interesting (ROI) were compared. The results of NPS indicated up to $3.5mm^{-1}$ including low Nyquist frequency. RQA5 indicated the lowest NPS and the others indicated higher NPS results relatively. NPS result of ROI a38 was higher than ROI a92 and this result indicated that there are more noise in left (cathode) than right (anode). This study were to evaluate NPS by using different radiation quality and setting the each ROI, and to suggest the quantitative methods of measuring NPS.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Investigation of Physical Imaging Properties in Various Digital Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2017;40(3):363-370. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2017.40.3.02
  2. Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Performance Characteristic of a CsI(Tl) Flat Panel Detector Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2012;35(2):109-117.
  3. ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements) Report No 41: Modulation Transfer Function of Screen-Film Systems. Bethesda. 1986.
  4. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Measurement of Image Quality According to the Time of Computed Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):365-374. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.4.05
  5. Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Evaluation of Image Quality for Various Electronic Portal Imaging Devices in Radiation Therapy. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):451-461. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.4.16
  6. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the Modulation Transfer Function for Computed Tomography by Using American Association Physics Medicine Phantom. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(2):193-198. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2016.39.2.09
  7. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the Performance Characteristic for Mammography by Using Edge device. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(3):415-420. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2016.39.3.16
  8. Fujita H, Tasai DY, Itoh T. A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1992;11(1):34-39. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.126908
  9. IEC (International Electro-technical Commission) 62220-1. Medical electrical equipment Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices Part 1: determination of the detective quantum efficiency. Geneva. 2003.
  10. Antonuk LE, Boudry J, Huang W. Demonstration of megavoltage and diagnostic X-ray imaging with hydrogenated amorphous silicon arrays. Med. Phys. 1992;19(6):1455-1466. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596802
  11. Granfors PR, Aufrichtig R. Performance of a $41{\times}41cm^2$ amorphous silicon flat panel X-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications. Med. Phys. 2000;27(6):1324-1333. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.599010
  12. Finc C, Hallscheidt PJ, and Noeldge G. Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2001;178(2):481-486.
  13. Bacher K, Smeets P, Bonnarens K, et al. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2003;181(4):923-929. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.181.4.1810923
  14. Schaetzing R. Computed radiography technology. Proceeding of Radiological Society of North America. 2003;10.
  15. Dobbins JT, Ergun DL, Rutz L, et al. DQE (f) of four generations of computed radiography acquisition devices. Med. Phys. 1995;22(10):1581-1593. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.597627
  16. Dobbins III JT, Samei E, Ranger NT, Chen Y. Inter comparison of methods for image quality characterization. II. Noise power spectrum. Medical Physics. 2006;33:1466-1475. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2188816