Are physical measures good indicators of image quality at low dose levels? A pilot study

Purpose: To evaluate if physical measures of noise predict image quality at high and low noise levels. Method: Twenty-four images were acquired on a DR system using a Pehamed DIGRAD phantom at three kVp settings (60, 70 and 81) across a range of mAs values. The image acquisition setup consisted of 14 cm of PMMA slabs with the phantom placed in the middle at 120 cm SID. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and Contrast-tonoise ratio (CNR) were calculated for each of the images using ImageJ software and 14 observers performed image scoring. Images were scored according to the observer`s evaluation of objects visualized within the phantom. Results: The R2 values of the non-linear relationship between objective visibility score and CNR (60kVp R2 = 0.902; 70Kvp R2 = 0.913; 80kVp R2 = 0.757) demonstrate a better fit for all 3 kVp settings than the linear R2 values. As CNR increases for all kVp settings the Object Visibility also increases. The largest increase for SNR at low exposure values (up to 2 mGy) is observed at 60kVp, when compared with 70 or 81kVp.CNR response to exposure is similar. Pearson r was calculated to assess the correlation between Score, OV, SNR and CNR. None of the correlations reached a level of statistical significance (p>0.01). Conclusion: For object visibility and SNR, tube potential variations may play a role in object visibility. Higher energy X-ray beam settings give lower SNR but higher object visibility. Object visibility and CNR at all three tube potentials are similar, resulting in a strong positive relationship between CNR and object visibility score. At low doses the impact of radiographic noise does not have a strong influence on object visibility scores because in noisy images objects could still be identified.

Are physical measures good indicators of clinical image quality at low dose levels? A pilot study

Background - For dose reduction actions, the principle of “image quality as good as possible” to “image quality as good as needed” requires to know whether the physical measures and visual image quality relate. Visual evaluation and objective physical measures of image quality can appear to be different. If there is no noticeable effect on the visual image quality with a low dose but there is a objective physical measure impact, then the overall dose may be reduced without compromising the diagnostic image quality. Low dose imaging can be used for certain types of observations, e.g. thoracic scoliosis, control after metal implantation for osteosynthesis, reviewing pneumonia and tuberculosis. Aim of the study - To determine whether physical measures of noise predict visual (clinical) image quality at low dose levels.

Dosimetria in vivo em tumores de mama: comparação entre a dose medida e calculada

Introdução – A dosimetria in vivo é útil na medição da dose administrada aos doentes durante o tratamento, avaliando diferenças significativas entre a dose prescrita e a dose administrada no volume alvo, bem como nos órgãos de risco. Objetivo – Comparar a dose medida com a dose calculada em doentes com tumores de mama com e sem filtro físico. Métodos – Realizaram-se medições da dose na pele, utilizando díodos tipo–p, para os campos tangenciais e respetivos field-in-field em 38 doentes. Resultados – Verificaram-se diferenças estatisticamente significativas nos campos tangenciais open (ρ=0,000). Discussão – Estudos reportam desvios sistemáticos significativos entre a dose calculada e a dose medida. Conclusão – Com este estudo conclui-se que não existe influência nas doses devido à presença do filtro físico.