Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Modulation Transfer Function in Measurements by Using Edge Device angle in Indirect Digital Radiography

간접평판형 검출기에서 변조전달함수 측정 시 Edge 각도에 따른 비교 연구

  • Min, Jung-Whan (Department of Radiological technology, Shingu University) ;
  • Jeong, Hoi-Woun (Department of Radiological Science, Baekseok Culture University)
  • Received : 2019.05.21
  • Accepted : 2019.08.09
  • Published : 2019.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was purpose to compare image quality of Indirect digital radiography (IDR) system by using the International electro-technical commission standard(IEC 62220-1) which were applied to IEC in medical imaging. To evaluation the analysis of Modulation transfer function(MTF) measurements edge device each angle by using edge method. In this study, Aero (Konica, Japan) which is Indirect flat panel detector(FPD) was used, the size of image receptor matrix $1994{\times}2430$ which performed 12bit processing and pixel pitch is $175{\mu}m$. In IEC standard method were applied to each angle were compared. The results of shown as LSF at $2.0^{\circ}$ and $3.0^{\circ}$ angeles. Shape is constant and shows smooth shape. The amount of data seemed reasonable and 2.19 cycles/mm and 2.01 cycles/mm at a spatial frequency of $2.0^{\circ}$ and $3.0^{\circ}$ at an MTF value of 0.1. At an MTF value of 0.5, the spatial frequencies were $2.0^{\circ}$ and 1.11 cycles/mm and 0.93 cycles/mm at an angle of $3.0^{\circ}$. This study were to evaluate MTF by setting the each $2{\sim}3^{\circ}$ each angle and to suggest the quantitative methods of measuring by using IEC.

Keywords

References

  1. Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Investigation of Physical Imaging Properties in Various Digital Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2017;40(3):363-70. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2017.40.3.02
  2. Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Performance Characteristic of a CsI(Tl) Flat Panel Detector Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2012;35(2):109-17.
  3. IEC (International Electro-technical Commission) 62220-1. Medical electrical equipment Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices Part 1: determination of the detective quantum efficiency. Geneva;2003.
  4. Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Evaluation of Image Quality for Various Electronic Portal Imaging Devices in Radiation Therapy. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):451-61. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.4.16
  5. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the Modulation Transfer Function for Computed Tomography by Using American Association Physics Medicine Phantom. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(2):193-8. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2016.39.2.09
  6. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Reimann DA. A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device. Medical Physics. 1998;25:102. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598165
  7. Greer PB, van Doorn T. Evaluation of an algorithm for the assessment of the MTF using an edge method. Medical Physics. 2000;27:2048. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1288682
  8. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Measurement of Image Quality According to the Time of Computed Radiography System. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):365-74. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.4.05
  9. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the Performance Characteristic for Mammography by Using Edge device. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(3):415-20. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2016.39.3.16
  10. Antonuk LE, Boudry J, Huang W. Demonstration of megavoltage and diagnostic X-ray imaging with hydrogenated amorphous silicon arrays. Med. Phys. 1992;19(6):1455-66. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596802
  11. Granfors PR, Aufrichtig R. Performance of a 41$\times$41 cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel X-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications. Med. Phys. 2000;27(6):1324-33. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.599010
  12. Finc C, Hallscheidt PJ, and Noeldge G. Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2001;178(2):481-86.
  13. Bacher K, Smeets P, Bonnarens K, et al. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2003;181(4):923-29. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.181.4.1810923
  14. Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Comparison of Noise Power Spectrum in Measurements by Using International Electro-technical Commission Standard Devices in Indirect Digital Radiography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2018;41(5):457-62. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2018.41.5.457
  15. Fujita H, Tasai DY, Itoh T. A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1992;11(1):34-9. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.126908