• 대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.65-78
• /
• 1992

Routine chest radiography is generally imaged by high voltage technique but some radiological technologists use low voltage for imaging. High voltage is usually said between $120\;kV{\sim}140\;kV$. Some RTs like using heavy filtration but others seldom like using it. However which is better for use calcium tungustate film screen system or ortho system and high contrast film or wide latitude c-type film for the exculusive use of chest radiography. We could not make a decision which is ideal method for use. In my opinion any method is not always exellent for chest radiography. In my experiments that I had at Kaken hospital in Japan last year I expect to keep the balance between image quality and diagnostic range and to reduce radiation dose for patients. My experiments are as follows. 1. We have looked into system characteristics(speed and contrast) in accordance with kVp($80{\sim}140$) and added filter($no{\sim}1/16\;VL$) in three screen film systems(BX3+CRONEX4, SRO750+MGH, SRO750+MGL). 2. We have looked into skin dose and film dose with same D=1.8 lung field density in accordance with kVp($80{\sim}140$) and added filter($no{\sim}1/16\;VL$) in three screen film systems. 3. We have compared with the evaluation between correlation of physical image quality(MTF) and optical diagnostic capability. Result are follows. 1. Speed of BX3+CRONEX4 became higher in accodance with kVp and thickness of filter but speed of ortho system was not as like regular system. Thicker filter diminished the speed over 100 kV range in SRO750+MGL. In case of SRO750+MGH speed of 1/16VL filter was looked into lower than speed of 1/4VL filter. Sensitivity of ortho system depends on tube voltage and added filter. 2. Skin dose has been detected $225\;{\mu}Gy{\sim}66\;{\mu}Gy$ in BX3+CRONEX4 from 80 kV, no filter to 140 kV, 1/16VL filter. SRO750+MGH could reduce the patient dose $1/2{\sim}1/3$ level in comparison to that of BX3+CRONEX4. 3. The higher kV was the worse MTF became the thicker filter was the worse MTF became too. MTF of BX3+CRONEX4 was detected better than MTF of SRO750+MGH but SRO750+MGH's optical detectability of small lesion in lung field came out better than that of BX3+CRONEX4. Conclusion Recently routine chest radiography is generally imaged by high voltage but it seems to be there are some questions in using of film screen combination. In high voltage chest radiography the subject contrast will come down that means latitude become wider. In this case if we select the low contrast film screen system(C or L type) the film contrast will fall down extremly and detectability of small lesion will be deteriorated. Wide latitude C, L type film has a merit of high detectability on mediastinum. Furthermore high contrast film screen system has the advantage to keep the high contrast in low density region as like mediastinum and heart shadow. Therefore in low subject contrast high voltage chest radiography we would rather choose the high contrast film screen system(H type) I think. From a view point of patient dose detectability of mediastinum and lung field. The optimum technical facter was found out 120 kV, 1/16VL filter : BX3+CRONEX4, 140 kV, 1/4VL filter : SRO750+MGH, 100 kV, 1/4VL filter : SRO750+MGL.