A novel quantitative measure of image quality in fluoroscopy |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Medical Physics, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin 7, Ireland;2. School of Medicine, University College, Dublin 4, Ireland;3. Medical Physics and Bioengineering, St James’s Hospital, Dublin 8, Ireland;1. Medical Physics Department, University Hospital “Maggiore della Carità” Novara, Italy;2. Radiology Department, University Hospital “Maggiore della Carità” Novara, Italy;1. Medical Physics Graduate Program, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand;2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Chulabhorn Hospital, Bangkok 10210, Thailand;3. Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Radiology, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, The Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok 10330, Thailand;4. Sonographer School, Faculty of Heath Science Technology, HRH Princess Chulabhorn College of Medical Science, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand;5. Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, The Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok 10330, Thailand;6. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand;7. Chulalongkorn University Biomedical Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand;1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Haim Sheba Medical Centre, Israel;2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Centre, Tel Aviv, Israel;3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rabin Medical Centre, Israel;1. ENEA-IRP, Radiation Protection Institute, Bologna, Italy;2. Faculty of Science, University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia;3. National Research Center for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine;4. KIT, Institute for Nuclear Waste Disposal, Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany;5. Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards (CRCE), PHE, Chilton, UK;6. Biomedical Engineering Department, Marquette University, Milwaukee, USA;7. Centro de Ciências e Tecnologias Nucleares, C2TN, Bobadela, Portugal;8. Departamento de Física e Astronomia, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal;9. Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, IRSN, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France;10. Ruđer Bošković Institute, Zagreb, Croatia;1. Department for Orthopaedic Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, D-89081 Ulm, Germany;2. Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Henkestr. 172, 91052 Erlangen, Germany |
| |
Abstract: | Assessment of fluoroscopic image quality has not kept pace with technological developments in interventional imaging equipment. Access to ‘for presentation’ data on these systems has motivated this investigation into a novel quantitative method of measuring image quality. We have developed a statistical algorithm as an alternative to subjective assessment using threshold contrast detail detectability techniques. Using sets of uniformity exposed fluoroscopy frames, the algorithm estimates the minimum contrast necessary for conspicuity of a range of virtual target object areas A. Pixel mean value distributions in a central image region are Gaussian, with standard deviation σ Pixel binning produces background distributions with area A. For 95% confidence of conspicuity a target object must exhibit a minimum contrast of 3.29σ. A range of threshold contrasts are calculated for a range of virtual areas. Analysis on a few seconds of fluoroscopy data is performed remotely and no test object is required. In this study Threshold Index and Contrast Detail curves were calculated for different incident air kerma rates at the detector, different levels of electronic magnification and different types of image processing. A limited number of direct comparisons were made with subjective assessments using the Leeds TO.10 test object. Results obtained indicate that the statistical algorithm is not only more sensitive to changes in levels of detector dose rate and magnification, but also to levels of image processing, including edge-enhancement. Threshold Index curves thus produced could be used as an interventional system optimisation tool and to objectively compare image quality between vendor systems. |
| |
Keywords: | Fluoroscopic Image quality Objective method Higher sensitivity System intercomparison |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|