Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of a digital system in chest radiology compared to the conventional film-screen system. The first studies (1-3) were purely clinical, had two parts, one clinical and one using phantoms, and the 5:th used solely phantoms. Except for the first - pilot - study, the studies were performed as receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. From one exposure, two digital radiographs were obtained, one simulating the film-screen radiograph and one enhanced, using an unsharp mask. The conventional radiograph was compared to this double-image, but in addition to this, even to the simulated normal and enhanced separately (1-3). To evaluate the value of inverted (positive) radiographs, the original digital (negative) radiographs were inverted, and then compared to the originals (4). As digitzation means easy storing and transfer of data and possibility of electronic display, the diagnostic performance of an interactive workstation was assessed (5). In the clinical studies, a variety of chest affections were used: atelectasis, tumor, pneumothorax, fibrosis, mediastinal and bony changes, tuberculosis, incompensations and enlargement of the heart (1), pneumothorax (2), fibrosis (3), and tumor (4). In the phantom studies, test objects simulating tumors (4) and pneumothorax (5) were used.
More>>
Citation Formats
Kehler, M.
Digital luminescence radiography of the chest. A clinical and experimental study.
Sweden: N. p.,
1991.
Web.
Kehler, M.
Digital luminescence radiography of the chest. A clinical and experimental study.
Sweden.
Kehler, M.
1991.
"Digital luminescence radiography of the chest. A clinical and experimental study."
Sweden.
@misc{etde_10111411,
title = {Digital luminescence radiography of the chest. A clinical and experimental study}
author = {Kehler, M}
abstractNote = {The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of a digital system in chest radiology compared to the conventional film-screen system. The first studies (1-3) were purely clinical, had two parts, one clinical and one using phantoms, and the 5:th used solely phantoms. Except for the first - pilot - study, the studies were performed as receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. From one exposure, two digital radiographs were obtained, one simulating the film-screen radiograph and one enhanced, using an unsharp mask. The conventional radiograph was compared to this double-image, but in addition to this, even to the simulated normal and enhanced separately (1-3). To evaluate the value of inverted (positive) radiographs, the original digital (negative) radiographs were inverted, and then compared to the originals (4). As digitzation means easy storing and transfer of data and possibility of electronic display, the diagnostic performance of an interactive workstation was assessed (5). In the clinical studies, a variety of chest affections were used: atelectasis, tumor, pneumothorax, fibrosis, mediastinal and bony changes, tuberculosis, incompensations and enlargement of the heart (1), pneumothorax (2), fibrosis (3), and tumor (4). In the phantom studies, test objects simulating tumors (4) and pneumothorax (5) were used. In no study was statistical significant difference seen between the digital and conventional system (p>0.05). Neither in the clinical nor the phantom study did inversion of the radiographs improve diagnostic performance. The workstation performed almost equally well as the radiographs even with a resolution of 1.25 1p/mm compared to the digital radiographs 2.5 and film-screen radiographs 5 1p/mm. (au) (50 refs.).}
place = {Sweden}
year = {1991}
month = {Oct}
}
title = {Digital luminescence radiography of the chest. A clinical and experimental study}
author = {Kehler, M}
abstractNote = {The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of a digital system in chest radiology compared to the conventional film-screen system. The first studies (1-3) were purely clinical, had two parts, one clinical and one using phantoms, and the 5:th used solely phantoms. Except for the first - pilot - study, the studies were performed as receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. From one exposure, two digital radiographs were obtained, one simulating the film-screen radiograph and one enhanced, using an unsharp mask. The conventional radiograph was compared to this double-image, but in addition to this, even to the simulated normal and enhanced separately (1-3). To evaluate the value of inverted (positive) radiographs, the original digital (negative) radiographs were inverted, and then compared to the originals (4). As digitzation means easy storing and transfer of data and possibility of electronic display, the diagnostic performance of an interactive workstation was assessed (5). In the clinical studies, a variety of chest affections were used: atelectasis, tumor, pneumothorax, fibrosis, mediastinal and bony changes, tuberculosis, incompensations and enlargement of the heart (1), pneumothorax (2), fibrosis (3), and tumor (4). In the phantom studies, test objects simulating tumors (4) and pneumothorax (5) were used. In no study was statistical significant difference seen between the digital and conventional system (p>0.05). Neither in the clinical nor the phantom study did inversion of the radiographs improve diagnostic performance. The workstation performed almost equally well as the radiographs even with a resolution of 1.25 1p/mm compared to the digital radiographs 2.5 and film-screen radiographs 5 1p/mm. (au) (50 refs.).}
place = {Sweden}
year = {1991}
month = {Oct}
}