Evaluation of image quality and patient exposure in fluoroscopy using a phantom: Is there any clinical relevance?
•Modern X-ray systems have numerous X-ray preset protocols; some are a “black box”.•X-ray system manufacturers offer more radiation optimization tools than in the past.•Protocol selection has large impact on image quality and patient radiation dose.•There are limitations on how software reproduces v...
Saved in:
| Published in: | European journal of radiology Vol. 138; p. 109607 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Ireland
Elsevier B.V
01.05.2021
|
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 0720-048X, 1872-7727, 1872-7727 |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Abstract | •Modern X-ray systems have numerous X-ray preset protocols; some are a “black box”.•X-ray system manufacturers offer more radiation optimization tools than in the past.•Protocol selection has large impact on image quality and patient radiation dose.•There are limitations on how software reproduces visual image quality evaluations.•Performance of protocols under clinical conditions cannot be assessed by phantoms.
To investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure.
A quality control (QC) phantom was imaged with a modern digital C-arm system, using various preset fluoroscopy protocols. IQ was assessed using human observers and in-house software for automated evaluation, based on contrast-to-noise ratios of details and their background. Patient radiation exposure was evaluated using the displayed Incident Air-Kerma and Kerma-Area Product values.
Protocol selection affects radiation exposure by a factor of about 3. IQ evaluation showed that acquisition protocols produce images with quite different characteristics. The visual IQ evaluation method was time consuming and cumbersome. The automated method, utilized the visual IQ evaluation results for calibration of detection thresholds. However, it failed to reproduce these results for all images and details types. In some images, digital image processing created artifacts which affected the pixel value distributions around details in a way that could be handled only by the human vision.
Manufacturers provide many preset protocols designated for specific clinical uses, which have large impact on IQ characteristics and radiation exposure. However, protocol settings’ selection rationale is essentially a “black box” for the end user. Though QC phantoms are currently used for IQ evaluation, they are not appropriate for drawing firm conclusions concerning the expected performance of each protocol in clinical practice. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimum technical characteristics of preset protocols for specific procedures. More work is needed in this area. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | •Modern X-ray systems have numerous X-ray preset protocols; some are a “black box”.•X-ray system manufacturers offer more radiation optimization tools than in the past.•Protocol selection has large impact on image quality and patient radiation dose.•There are limitations on how software reproduces visual image quality evaluations.•Performance of protocols under clinical conditions cannot be assessed by phantoms.
To investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure.
A quality control (QC) phantom was imaged with a modern digital C-arm system, using various preset fluoroscopy protocols. IQ was assessed using human observers and in-house software for automated evaluation, based on contrast-to-noise ratios of details and their background. Patient radiation exposure was evaluated using the displayed Incident Air-Kerma and Kerma-Area Product values.
Protocol selection affects radiation exposure by a factor of about 3. IQ evaluation showed that acquisition protocols produce images with quite different characteristics. The visual IQ evaluation method was time consuming and cumbersome. The automated method, utilized the visual IQ evaluation results for calibration of detection thresholds. However, it failed to reproduce these results for all images and details types. In some images, digital image processing created artifacts which affected the pixel value distributions around details in a way that could be handled only by the human vision.
Manufacturers provide many preset protocols designated for specific clinical uses, which have large impact on IQ characteristics and radiation exposure. However, protocol settings’ selection rationale is essentially a “black box” for the end user. Though QC phantoms are currently used for IQ evaluation, they are not appropriate for drawing firm conclusions concerning the expected performance of each protocol in clinical practice. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimum technical characteristics of preset protocols for specific procedures. More work is needed in this area. To investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure.OBJECTIVETo investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure.A quality control (QC) phantom was imaged with a modern digital C-arm system, using various preset fluoroscopy protocols. IQ was assessed using human observers and in-house software for automated evaluation, based on contrast-to-noise ratios of details and their background. Patient radiation exposure was evaluated using the displayed Incident Air-Kerma and Kerma-Area Product values.MATERIALS & METHODSA quality control (QC) phantom was imaged with a modern digital C-arm system, using various preset fluoroscopy protocols. IQ was assessed using human observers and in-house software for automated evaluation, based on contrast-to-noise ratios of details and their background. Patient radiation exposure was evaluated using the displayed Incident Air-Kerma and Kerma-Area Product values.Protocol selection affects radiation exposure by a factor of about 3. IQ evaluation showed that acquisition protocols produce images with quite different characteristics. The visual IQ evaluation method was time consuming and cumbersome. The automated method, utilized the visual IQ evaluation results for calibration of detection thresholds. However, it failed to reproduce these results for all images and details types. In some images, digital image processing created artifacts which affected the pixel value distributions around details in a way that could be handled only by the human vision.RESULTSProtocol selection affects radiation exposure by a factor of about 3. IQ evaluation showed that acquisition protocols produce images with quite different characteristics. The visual IQ evaluation method was time consuming and cumbersome. The automated method, utilized the visual IQ evaluation results for calibration of detection thresholds. However, it failed to reproduce these results for all images and details types. In some images, digital image processing created artifacts which affected the pixel value distributions around details in a way that could be handled only by the human vision.Manufacturers provide many preset protocols designated for specific clinical uses, which have large impact on IQ characteristics and radiation exposure. However, protocol settings' selection rationale is essentially a "black box" for the end user. Though QC phantoms are currently used for IQ evaluation, they are not appropriate for drawing firm conclusions concerning the expected performance of each protocol in clinical practice. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimum technical characteristics of preset protocols for specific procedures. More work is needed in this area.CONCLUSIONManufacturers provide many preset protocols designated for specific clinical uses, which have large impact on IQ characteristics and radiation exposure. However, protocol settings' selection rationale is essentially a "black box" for the end user. Though QC phantoms are currently used for IQ evaluation, they are not appropriate for drawing firm conclusions concerning the expected performance of each protocol in clinical practice. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimum technical characteristics of preset protocols for specific procedures. More work is needed in this area. To investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure. A quality control (QC) phantom was imaged with a modern digital C-arm system, using various preset fluoroscopy protocols. IQ was assessed using human observers and in-house software for automated evaluation, based on contrast-to-noise ratios of details and their background. Patient radiation exposure was evaluated using the displayed Incident Air-Kerma and Kerma-Area Product values. Protocol selection affects radiation exposure by a factor of about 3. IQ evaluation showed that acquisition protocols produce images with quite different characteristics. The visual IQ evaluation method was time consuming and cumbersome. The automated method, utilized the visual IQ evaluation results for calibration of detection thresholds. However, it failed to reproduce these results for all images and details types. In some images, digital image processing created artifacts which affected the pixel value distributions around details in a way that could be handled only by the human vision. Manufacturers provide many preset protocols designated for specific clinical uses, which have large impact on IQ characteristics and radiation exposure. However, protocol settings' selection rationale is essentially a "black box" for the end user. Though QC phantoms are currently used for IQ evaluation, they are not appropriate for drawing firm conclusions concerning the expected performance of each protocol in clinical practice. Currently, there is no consensus on the optimum technical characteristics of preset protocols for specific procedures. More work is needed in this area. |
| ArticleNumber | 109607 |
| Author | Tsapaki, V. Tsalafoutas, I.A. Triantopoulou, I. |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: I.A. surname: Tsalafoutas fullname: Tsalafoutas, I.A. organization: OHS Department, Radiation Safety Section, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar – sequence: 2 givenname: V. surname: Tsapaki fullname: Tsapaki, V. email: virginia@otenet.gr organization: Medical Physics Unit, Konstantopoulio Hospital, Nea Ionia, Athens, 142 33, Greece – sequence: 3 givenname: I. surname: Triantopoulou fullname: Triantopoulou, I. organization: Medical Physics Unit, Konstantopoulio Hospital, Nea Ionia, Athens, 142 33, Greece |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33667936$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNqFkUFrFDEYhoNU7Lb6CwTJ0cusSSYzmVGkSKlaKHhR8BYymS9t1mwym2QW59-bdruXHuwhBJL3-eB7nzN04oMHhN5SsqaEth82a9hENa4ZYbS89C0RL9CKdoJVQjBxglZEMFIR3v0-RWcpbQghDe_ZK3Ra120r-rpdod3VXrlZZRs8DgbbrboFvJuVs3nByo94Kn_gM4a_U0hzBGw9Nm4OMSQdpgXPyfpbrPB0p3wO24_4OuF8ByWo_IK1s95q5XAEB3vlNVy8Ri-NcgnePN7n6NfXq5-X36ubH9-uL7_cVJpTmitjzMAGXk7DBIiuG5QwMPJhaKkRtKYjE6YFwUkNBmqheUOoauhgDAwdNPU5en-YO8WwmyFlubVJg3PKQ5iTZLzveC9axkr03WN0HrYwyimWHuIijzWVQH8I6LJ2imCktvmhtByVdZISea9EbuSDEnmvRB6UFLZ-wh7H_5_6fKCgVLS3EGXSxYOG0UbQWY7BPsN_esIfVfyB5Vn6H7dvu-E |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1109_ACCESS_2024_3375940 crossref_primary_10_1002_acm2_14285 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_media_2024_103322 crossref_primary_10_1007_s12553_024_00919_7 |
| Cites_doi | 10.1259/bjr/37630380 10.1118/1.4932623 10.1148/radiol.2016152710 10.1093/rpd/nci707 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.12.009 10.1038/s41598-019-50925-3 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.01.131 10.1148/rg.273065075 10.1007/s00330-018-5620-y 10.1148/radiol.11110447 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.07.015 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | 2021 Elsevier B.V. Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: 2021 Elsevier B.V. – notice: Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
| DBID | AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607 |
| DatabaseName | CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| Discipline | Medicine |
| EISSN | 1872-7727 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 33667936 10_1016_j_ejrad_2021_109607 S0720048X21000875 |
| Genre | Journal Article |
| GroupedDBID | --- --K --M .1- .FO .GJ .~1 0R~ 1B1 1P~ 1RT 1~. 1~5 29G 4.4 457 4CK 4G. 53G 5GY 5RE 5VS 6PF 7-5 71M 8P~ 9JM AABNK AAEDT AAEDW AAIKJ AAKOC AALRI AAOAW AAQFI AAQXK AATTM AAWTL AAXKI AAXUO AAYWO ABBQC ABFNM ABJNI ABLJU ABMAC ABMZM ABWVN ABXDB ACDAQ ACIEU ACIUM ACLOT ACRLP ACRPL ACVFH ADBBV ADCNI ADEZE ADMUD ADNMO AEBSH AEIPS AEKER AENEX AEUPX AEVXI AFJKZ AFPUW AFRHN AFTJW AFXIZ AGHFR AGQPQ AGUBO AGYEJ AHHHB AIEXJ AIGII AIIUN AIKHN AITUG AJRQY AJUYK AKBMS AKRWK AKYEP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMRAJ ANKPU ANZVX APXCP ASPBG AVWKF AXJTR AZFZN BKOJK BLXMC BNPGV CS3 EBS EFJIC EFKBS EFLBG EJD EO8 EO9 EP2 EP3 F5P FDB FEDTE FGOYB FIRID FNPLU FYGXN G-2 G-Q GBLVA HEI HMK HMO HVGLF HZ~ IHE J1W KOM M29 M41 MO0 N9A O-L O9- OAUVE OI~ OU0 OZT P-8 P-9 P2P PC. Q38 R2- ROL RPZ SAE SDF SDG SEL SES SEW SPCBC SSH SSZ T5K UV1 WUQ Z5R ZGI ~G- ~HD AACTN AAIAV ABLVK ABYKQ AFCTW AFKWA AJBFU AJOXV AMFUW LCYCR RIG ZA5 9DU AAYXX CITATION AGCQF AGRNS CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-fffb2b4b2b527e788ba7fed4bb61f7131d27f6e7403efe37c4501a51bffeb8e53 |
| ISICitedReferencesCount | 4 |
| ISICitedReferencesURI | http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000640407600002&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| ISSN | 0720-048X 1872-7727 |
| IngestDate | Sun Sep 28 08:06:35 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 05:38:53 EDT 2025 Tue Nov 18 21:07:20 EST 2025 Sat Nov 29 07:15:24 EST 2025 Fri Feb 23 02:45:31 EST 2024 Tue Oct 14 19:31:26 EDT 2025 |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Keywords | Image quality Radiation exposure Image artifacts Image processing algorithms Digital fluoroscopy |
| Language | English |
| License | Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
| LinkModel | OpenURL |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c411t-fffb2b4b2b527e788ba7fed4bb61f7131d27f6e7403efe37c4501a51bffeb8e53 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
| PMID | 33667936 |
| PQID | 2498497622 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2498497622 pubmed_primary_33667936 crossref_citationtrail_10_1016_j_ejrad_2021_109607 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ejrad_2021_109607 elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_ejrad_2021_109607 elsevier_clinicalkey_doi_10_1016_j_ejrad_2021_109607 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | May 2021 2021-05-00 2021-May 20210501 |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2021-05-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 05 year: 2021 text: May 2021 |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | Ireland |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Ireland |
| PublicationTitle | European journal of radiology |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Eur J Radiol |
| PublicationYear | 2021 |
| Publisher | Elsevier B.V |
| Publisher_xml | – name: Elsevier B.V |
| References | Bushberg, Seibert, Leidholdt (bib0095) 2012 Jones, Heintz, Geiser, Goldman, Jerjian, Martin, Peck, Pfeiffer, Ranger, Yorkston (bib0015) 2015; 42 Dave, Eschelman, Wasserman, Gonsalves, Gingold (bib0125) 2016; 27 Tapiovaara (bib0045) 2005; 117 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (bib0025) 2014 AAPM REPORT NO 151 (bib0030) 2015 Ziehm Imaging. DICOM conformance statement: Ziem Port. Document No: 28415, Release Date: 01/10/2018. National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB)1992 (bib0050) 1992 Irnstorfer, Unger, Hojreh, Homolka (bib0150) 2019; 9 Dose management at Ziehm Imaging for 2D imaging. White Paper No. 41 / 2019. Personal communication. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (bib0020) 2015 Last assessed 18th January 2021. Tsalafoutas, Kasviki, Samartzis, Trimmis, Gkeli (bib0120) 2019; 64 Tsalafoutas, Metallidis (bib0060) 2011; 84 International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62220-1-1 (bib0085) 2015 Sakai, Tabei, Sato (bib0130) 2019; 29 (bib0055) 2007 De Crop, Bacher, Van Hoof (bib0145) 2012; 262 Yalcin, Olgar, Sancak, Atac, Akyar (bib0140) 2020 ICRP (bib0035) 2010; 40 Société Belge des Physiciens d’Hôpital (bib0090) 2015 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (bib0040) 2007 Al-Murshedi, Hogg, England (bib0135) 2019; 57 Körner, Weber, Wirth, Pfeifer, Reiser, Treitl (bib0005) 2007; 27 Jahnke, Limberg, Gerbl (bib0155) 2017; 282 AAPM REPORT N.O. 93 (bib0010) 2006 Drost, Reese, Hornof (bib0115) 2008; 49 AAPM REPORT NO 151 (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0030) 2015 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0065 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0025) 2014 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0100 Tsalafoutas (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0120) 2019; 64 ICRP (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0035) 2010; 40 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0105 AAPM REPORT N.O. 93 (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0010) 2006 Société Belge des Physiciens d’Hôpital (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0090) 2015 Dave (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0125) 2016; 27 Tapiovaara (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0045) 2005; 117 Sakai (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0130) 2019; 29 Irnstorfer (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0150) 2019; 9 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0080 Al-Murshedi (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0135) 2019; 57 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0020) 2015 International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62220-1-1 (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0085) 2015 Yalcin (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0140) 2020 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0075 Körner (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0005) 2007; 27 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0110 Tsalafoutas (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0060) 2011; 84 Drost (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0115) 2008; 49 National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB)1992 (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0050) 1992 Jones (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0015) 2015; 42 Bushberg (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0095) 2012 (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0055) 2007 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0070 Jahnke (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0155) 2017; 282 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0040) 2007 De Crop (10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0145) 2012; 262 |
| References_xml | – start-page: 10 year: 2006 ident: bib0010 article-title: Testing and Quality Control of Photostimulable Storage Phosphor Imaging Systems – year: 2015 ident: bib0020 article-title: Worldwide implementation of digital imaging in radiology publication-title: Human Health Series No. 28 – volume: 117 start-page: 116 year: 2005 end-page: 119 ident: bib0045 article-title: Image quality measurements in radiology publication-title: Radiat. Prot. Dosim. – volume: 9 start-page: 14357 year: 2019 ident: bib0150 article-title: An anthropomorphic phantom representing a prematurely born neonate for digital x-ray imaging using 3D printing: proof of concept and comparison of image quality from different systems publication-title: Sci. Rep. – volume: 29 start-page: 985 year: 2019 end-page: 992 ident: bib0130 article-title: Radiation dose reduction with frame rate conversion in X-ray fluoroscopic imaging systems with flat panel detector: basic study and clinical retrospective analysis publication-title: Eur. Radiol. – year: 2015 ident: bib0085 article-title: Medical Electrical Equipment - Characteristics of Digital X-ray Imaging Devices - Part 1-1: Determination of the Detective Quantum Efficiency - Detectors Used in Radiographic Imaging – volume: 64 start-page: 238 year: 2019 end-page: 244 ident: bib0120 article-title: The impact of image processing algorithms on digital radiography of patients with metalic hip implants publication-title: Phys. Med. – volume: 40 year: 2010 ident: bib0035 article-title: Radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures outside the imaging department. ICRP publication 117 publication-title: Ann. ICRP – year: 2014 ident: bib0025 article-title: Diagnostic Radiology Physics – volume: 49 start-page: S48 year: 2008 end-page: 56 ident: bib0115 article-title: Digital radiography artifacts publication-title: Vet. Radiol. Ultrasound – year: 1992 ident: bib0050 article-title: National Protocol for Patient Dose Measurements in Diagnostic Radiology – year: 2015 ident: bib0090 article-title: Belgian Protocol for Annual Quality Control of X-Ray Equipment: Systems for Fluoroscopy – volume: 27 start-page: 593 year: 2016 end-page: 600 ident: bib0125 article-title: A phantom study and a retrospective clinical analysis to investigate the impact of a new image processing technology on radiation dose and image quality during hepatic embolization publication-title: J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. – volume: 42 start-page: 6658 year: 2015 end-page: 6670 ident: bib0015 article-title: Ongoing quality control in digital radiography: report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 151 publication-title: Med. Phys. – reference: Dose management at Ziehm Imaging for 2D imaging. White Paper No. 41 / 2019. Personal communication. – year: 2007 ident: bib0040 article-title: Dosimetry in diagnostic radiology: an International code of practice publication-title: Technical Reports Series No. 457 – year: 2007 ident: bib0055 article-title: DIN 6868-4. Image Quality Assurance in Diagnostic X-ray Departments - Part 4: Constancy Testing of Medical X-ray Equipment for Fluoroscopy – reference: Ziehm Imaging. DICOM conformance statement: Ziem Port. Document No: 28415, Release Date: 01/10/2018. – volume: 282 start-page: 569 year: 2017 end-page: 575 ident: bib0155 article-title: Radiopaque three-dimensional printing: a method to create realistic CT phantoms publication-title: Radiology. – volume: 27 start-page: 675 year: 2007 end-page: 686 ident: bib0005 article-title: Advances in digital radiography: physical principles and system overview publication-title: Radiographics – reference: . Last assessed 18th January 2021. – start-page: 92 year: 2012 ident: bib0095 article-title: The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging – year: 2020 ident: bib0140 article-title: Correlation between physical measurements and observer evaluations of image quality in digital chest radiography [published online ahead of print, 2020 May 19] publication-title: Med. Phys. – volume: 262 start-page: 298 year: 2012 end-page: 304 ident: bib0145 article-title: Correlation of contrast-detail analysis and clinical image quality assessment in chest radiography with a human cadaver study publication-title: Radiology – volume: 57 start-page: 65 year: 2019 end-page: 71 ident: bib0135 article-title: Relationship between body habitus and image quality and radiation dose in chest X-ray examinations: a phantom study publication-title: Phys. Med. – volume: 84 start-page: 236 year: 2011 end-page: 243 ident: bib0060 article-title: A method for calculating the dose length product from CT DICOM images publication-title: Br. J. Radiol. – year: 2015 ident: bib0030 article-title: Ongoing Quality Control in Digital Radiography: The Report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 151 – volume: 49 start-page: S48 issue: January-February (1 Suppl 1) year: 2008 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0115 article-title: Digital radiography artifacts publication-title: Vet. Radiol. Ultrasound – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0065 – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0080 – year: 2014 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0025 – volume: 84 start-page: 236 year: 2011 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0060 article-title: A method for calculating the dose length product from CT DICOM images publication-title: Br. J. Radiol. doi: 10.1259/bjr/37630380 – volume: 42 start-page: 6658 issue: 11 year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0015 article-title: Ongoing quality control in digital radiography: report of AAPM Imaging Physics Committee Task Group 151 publication-title: Med. Phys. doi: 10.1118/1.4932623 – volume: 282 start-page: 569 issue: February (2) year: 2017 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0155 article-title: Radiopaque three-dimensional printing: a method to create realistic CT phantoms publication-title: Radiology. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016152710 – volume: 117 start-page: 116 issue: 1-3 year: 2005 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0045 article-title: Image quality measurements in radiology publication-title: Radiat. Prot. Dosim. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nci707 – volume: 57 start-page: 65 year: 2019 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0135 article-title: Relationship between body habitus and image quality and radiation dose in chest X-ray examinations: a phantom study publication-title: Phys. Med. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.12.009 – volume: 9 start-page: 14357 issue: 1 year: 2019 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0150 article-title: An anthropomorphic phantom representing a prematurely born neonate for digital x-ray imaging using 3D printing: proof of concept and comparison of image quality from different systems publication-title: Sci. Rep. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-50925-3 – volume: 40 issue: 6 year: 2010 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0035 article-title: Radiological protection in fluoroscopically guided procedures outside the imaging department. ICRP publication 117 publication-title: Ann. ICRP – year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0030 – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0075 – year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0090 – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0100 – year: 2020 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0140 article-title: Correlation between physical measurements and observer evaluations of image quality in digital chest radiography [published online ahead of print, 2020 May 19] publication-title: Med. Phys. – year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0040 article-title: Dosimetry in diagnostic radiology: an International code of practice – volume: 27 start-page: 593 issue: 4 year: 2016 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0125 article-title: A phantom study and a retrospective clinical analysis to investigate the impact of a new image processing technology on radiation dose and image quality during hepatic embolization publication-title: J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.01.131 – year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0085 – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0105 – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0070 – volume: 27 start-page: 675 issue: 3 year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0005 article-title: Advances in digital radiography: physical principles and system overview publication-title: Radiographics doi: 10.1148/rg.273065075 – year: 2015 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0020 article-title: Worldwide implementation of digital imaging in radiology – start-page: 92 year: 2012 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0095 – year: 1992 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0050 – start-page: 10 year: 2006 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0010 – ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0110 – volume: 29 start-page: 985 issue: 2 year: 2019 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0130 article-title: Radiation dose reduction with frame rate conversion in X-ray fluoroscopic imaging systems with flat panel detector: basic study and clinical retrospective analysis publication-title: Eur. Radiol. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5620-y – year: 2007 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0055 – volume: 262 start-page: 298 issue: 1 year: 2012 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0145 article-title: Correlation of contrast-detail analysis and clinical image quality assessment in chest radiography with a human cadaver study publication-title: Radiology doi: 10.1148/radiol.11110447 – volume: 64 start-page: 238 year: 2019 ident: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607_bib0120 article-title: The impact of image processing algorithms on digital radiography of patients with metalic hip implants publication-title: Phys. Med. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.07.015 |
| SSID | ssj0005492 |
| Score | 2.3392563 |
| Snippet | •Modern X-ray systems have numerous X-ray preset protocols; some are a “black box”.•X-ray system manufacturers offer more radiation optimization tools than in... To investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure. A quality control (QC)... To investigate the impact of X-ray preset acquisition protocol settings on fluoroscopy image quality (IQ) and radiation exposure.OBJECTIVETo investigate the... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed crossref elsevier |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
| StartPage | 109607 |
| SubjectTerms | Digital fluoroscopy Fluoroscopy Humans Image artifacts Image processing algorithms Image Processing, Computer-Assisted Image quality Phantoms, Imaging Radiation Dosage Radiation Exposure |
| Title | Evaluation of image quality and patient exposure in fluoroscopy using a phantom: Is there any clinical relevance? |
| URI | https://www.clinicalkey.com/#!/content/1-s2.0-S0720048X21000875 https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109607 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33667936 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2498497622 |
| Volume | 138 |
| WOSCitedRecordID | wos000640407600002&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D |
| hasFullText | 1 |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| journalDatabaseRights | – providerCode: PRVESC databaseName: Elsevier SD Freedom Collection Journals 2021 customDbUrl: eissn: 1872-7727 dateEnd: 99991231 omitProxy: false ssIdentifier: ssj0005492 issn: 0720-048X databaseCode: AIEXJ dateStart: 19950101 isFulltext: true titleUrlDefault: https://www.sciencedirect.com providerName: Elsevier |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1Lj9MwELa6uwhxQbwpj5WRuC2pYseJXS6oQkUUiRUSBfUWOaktWoUktM1qe-G3M7bz6G61y0Pi0Khy6zrxfB3PjMffIPSSKkVZkAovJb4CB8Wfe9JXkSdTQnWYUKGptMUm-OmpmM2Gn3q9n81ZmLOM57k4Px-W_1XU0AbCNkdn_0Lc7Y9CA7wHocMVxA7XPxL8uOXvtnQQ301Sjjs66aiWaiZVw-1fmPCgiXjorCoMrWVRbk8qGz2QJ-U3U1_YxvEna2Of2p2GbXeW0pRbsQkEl5MDdwP8tbG7kvPFhQD-dC0zqQuTEW7V1GA02PmolK6a9teuEWYObqcsqqyoXI_dgAUlXXqgi6LtnaSxyo5Tk2ZqywzDuuSUseDW-ucXtLUjg9nT_C4IsRyoJTzRwIxrmLIiV1L3EqX2ZzOaGYya3Q3w2A7QEeXhELTi0Wgynn3okoSYLavd3l3DW2UzBPeGusq2ucp3sTbM9A66XTsfeORAcxf1VH4P3fxYp1fcRz867OBCY4sdXGMHA3ZwjR3cYAcvcryDHWyxgyWusfMaT9bYIgd6b3GDHNwi580D9OXdePr2vVfX5PBSRsjG01onNGHwCilXXIhEcq3mLEkiojkJyJxyHSnO_EBpFfCUhT6RIUm0VolQYfAQHeZFrh4jzESY-orqFFx8pqTZgQ59KkNBJEmoFn1Em9mM05qw3tRNyeImM3EZWxHERgSxE0EfvWo7lY6v5fqvs0ZMcTMJsHjGgKrru0Vtt9pSdRbo7zu-aLAQgx43m3MyV0W1jikbCga-AaV99MiBpH2AIIgiWEejJ_867FN0q_snPkOHm1WlnqMb6dlmsV4dowM-E8c19H8Bvi3QZg |
| linkProvider | Elsevier |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+image+quality+and+patient+exposure+in+fluoroscopy+using+a+phantom%3A+Is+there+any+clinical+relevance%3F&rft.jtitle=European+journal+of+radiology&rft.au=Tsalafoutas%2C+I.A.&rft.au=Tsapaki%2C+V.&rft.au=Triantopoulou%2C+I.&rft.date=2021-05-01&rft.pub=Elsevier+B.V&rft.issn=0720-048X&rft.eissn=1872-7727&rft.volume=138&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.ejrad.2021.109607&rft.externalDocID=S0720048X21000875 |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0720-048X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0720-048X&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0720-048X&client=summon |