Detection of simulated nodules on clinical radiographs: dose reduction at digital posteroanterior chest radiography.

PURPOSE To determine to what extent dose reduction results in decreased detection of simulated nodules on patient digital posteroanterior (PA) chest radiographs. MATERIALS AND METHODS Raw data from 20 clinical digital PA chest images that were reported as having normal findings and that were obtained with a slot-scan charge-coupled device system were used. For research protocol that concerns data with patient identities concealed, institutional review board approval is not required. One hundred twenty nodules varying in size and signal intensity were digitally simulated and added to the chest images. Hard copies were printed to represent a 100% dose and, by adding noise, to represent simulated patient doses of 50%, 25%, and 12%. Four radiologists reviewed images. Each lesion was registered as "detected" or "not detected." A semiparametric logistic regression model was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS The decrease in radiation dose from 100% to 50%, 25%, or 12% had no effect on lesion detection in the lungs. The decrease in radiation dose had an effect on lesion detection in the mediastinum, as probabilities deteriorated from the 100% dose to the 50%, 25%, and 12% dose with each step. Probabilities of smaller detection rates when compared with that of the reference category (100% dose) were 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.86, 0.012) for the 50% dose, 1 (CI: -0.59, -0.61) for the 25% dose, and 1 (CI: -2.41, -1.22) for the 12% dose. CIs for the effects were on the log(odds). Detection probability decreased with smaller and lower signal intensity lesions. CONCLUSION At clinical digital radiography, dose reduction resulted in decreased observer detection of simulated nodules in the mediastinum but not in the lungs.

[1]  E Samei,et al.  Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs. , 1999, Radiology.

[2]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Subtle lung nodules: influence of local anatomic variations on detection. , 2003, Radiology.

[3]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: summary of the RADIUS chest trial. , 2005, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[4]  C. Engelke,et al.  Chest radiography with a digital flat-panel detector: experimental receiver operating characteristic analysis. , 2005, Radiology.

[5]  Y. van der Graaf,et al.  Effect of Dose Levels on the Diagnostic Performance of a Selenium-Based Digital Chest System , 2001, Investigative radiology.

[6]  Markus Völk,et al.  Routine chest radiography using a flat-panel detector: image quality at standard detector dose and 33% dose reduction. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  K. Ludwig,et al.  Detection of simulated interstitial lung disease and catheters with selenium, storage phosphor, and film-based radiography. , 1999, Radiology.

[8]  H. Jäger,et al.  Digital radiography versus conventional radiography in chest imaging: diagnostic performance of a large-area silicon flat-panel detector in a clinical CT-controlled study. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Single and multiscale detection of masses in digital mammograms , 1999, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[10]  Y. van der Graaf,et al.  Effects of dose reduction on digital chest imaging using a selenium detector: a study of detecting simulated diffuse interstitial pulmonary disease. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  M. Völk,et al.  Detection of simulated chest lesions with normal and reduced radiation dose: comparison of conventional screen-film radiography and a flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon. , 1998, Investigative radiology.

[12]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Fundamental imaging characteristics of a slot-scan digital chest radiographic system. , 2004, Medical physics.

[13]  U Neitzel,et al.  Selenium radiography versus storage phosphor and conventional radiography in the detection of simulated chest lesions. , 1996, Radiology.

[14]  C. Fink,et al.  Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  Hagen Schmidl,et al.  Flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon versus asymmetric screen-film system: phantom study of dose reduction and depiction of simulated findings. , 2003, Radiology.

[16]  W. Veldkamp,et al.  Comparison of eight different digital chest radiography systems: variation in detection of simulated chest disease. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  Albert de Roos,et al.  Digital slot-scan charge-coupled device radiography versus AMBER and Bucky screen-film radiography for detection of simulated nodules and interstitial disease in a chest phantom. , 2004, Radiology.

[18]  Peter Smeets,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. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  Boris Radeleff,et al.  Comparing image quality of flat-panel chest radiography with storage phosphor radiography and film-screen radiography. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Nodule detection in digital chest radiography: introduction to the RADIUS chest trial. , 2005, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[21]  W. Veldkamp,et al.  Digital slot-scan charge-coupled device radiography versus AMBER and Bucky screen-film radiography: comparison of image quality in a phantom study. , 2005, Radiology.