A method for the determination of the two-dimensional MTF of digital radiography systems using only the noise response

We present a new method that enables the determination of the two-dimensional MTF of digital radiography systems using the noise response measured from flat-field images. Unlike commonly-used methods that measure the onedimensional MTF, this new method does not require precision-made test-objects (slits/edges) or precise tool alignment. Although standard methods are dependent upon data processing that can result in inaccuracies and inconsistencies, this method based on the intrinsic noise response of the imager is highly accurate and less susceptible to such problems. A cascaded-linear-systems analysis was used to derive an exact relationship between the noise power spectrum (NPS) and the presampled MTF of a generalized detector system. The NPS was then used to determine the two-dimensional MTF for three systems: a simulated detector in which the "true" MTF was known exactly, a commercial indirect flat-panel detector (FPD), and a new solid-state x-ray image intensifier (SSXII). For the simulated detector, excellent agreement was observed between the "true" MTF and that determined using the noise response method, with an averaged deviation of 0.3%. The FPD MTF was shown to increase on the diagonals and was measured at 2.5 cycles/mm to be 0.086±0.007, 0.12±0.01, and 0.087±0.007 at 0, 45, and 90°, respectively. No statistically significant variation was observed for the SSXII as a function of angle. Measuring the two-dimensional MTF should lead to more accurate characterization of the detector resolution response, incorporating any potential non-isotropy which may result from the physical characteristics of the sensor, including the active-area shape of the pixel array.

[1]  Ann-Katherine Carton,et al.  Validation of MTF measurement for digital mammography quality control. , 2005, Medical physics.

[2]  Orly Yadid-Pecht.  Geometrical modulation transfer function for different pixel active area shapes , 2000 .

[3]  J. Yaoa,et al.  Parallel cascades: New ways to describe noise transfer in medical imaging systems , 2001 .

[4]  Magnus Båth,et al.  Determination of the two-dimensional detective quantum efficiency of a computed radiography system. , 2003, Medical physics.

[5]  J Yorkston,et al.  Empirical and theoretical investigation of the noise performance of indirect detection, active matrix flat-panel imagers (AMFPIs) for diagnostic radiology. , 1997, Medical physics.

[6]  Stephen Rudin,et al.  Micro-angiography for neuro-vascular imaging. II. Cascade model analysis. , 2003, Medical physics.

[7]  I A Cunningham,et al.  Normalization of the modulation transfer function: the open-field approach. , 2008, Medical physics.

[8]  M B Williams,et al.  Analysis of the detective quantum efficiency of a developmental detector for digital mammography. , 1999, Medical Physics (Lancaster).

[9]  Stephen Rudin,et al.  Accurate MTF measurement in digital radiography using noise response. , 2010, Medical physics.

[10]  Ulrich Neitzel,et al.  Determination of the modulation transfer function using the edge method: influence of scattered radiation. , 2004, Medical physics.

[11]  Daniel R. Bednarek,et al.  The solid state x-ray image intensifier (SSXII): an EMCCD-based x-ray detector , 2008, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[12]  Wei Zhao,et al.  Imaging performance of amorphous selenium based flat-panel detectors for digital mammography: characterization of a small area prototype detector. , 2003, Medical physics.

[13]  Kenneth A Fetterly,et al.  Measurement of the presampled two-dimensional modulation transfer function of digital imaging systems. , 2002, Medical physics.

[14]  Ulrich Neitzel,et al.  Accuracy of a simple method for deriving the presampled modulation transfer function of a digital radiographic system from an edge image. , 2003, Medical physics.

[15]  Stephen Rudin,et al.  Progress in electron-multiplying CCD (EMCCD) based high-resolution high-sensitivity x-ray detector for fluoroscopy and radiography , 2007, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[16]  Patrik Sund,et al.  Method for determining the two-dimensional presampling modulation transfer function in digital radiography , 2001, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[17]  Ian A. Cunningham.  Use of the detective quantum efficiency in a quality assurance program , 2008, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[18]  Ying Chen,et al.  Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. I. Modulation transfer function. , 2006, Medical physics.

[19]  Alistair Mackenzie,et al.  Characterization of noise sources for two generations of computed radiography systems using powder and crystalline photostimulable phosphors. , 2007, Medical physics.

[20]  J A Rowlands,et al.  Absorption and noise in cesium iodide x-ray image intensifiers. , 1983, Medical physics.

[21]  E. Samei,et al.  A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device. , 1998, Medical physics.

[22]  I A Cunningham,et al.  Fundamental x-ray interaction limits in diagnostic imaging detectors: Frequency-dependent Swank noise. , 2008, Medical physics.

[23]  I A Cunningham,et al.  Signal and noise in modulation transfer function determinations using the slit, wire, and edge techniques. , 1992, Medical physics.

[24]  Kunio Doi,et al.  A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography , 1992, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[25]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Determination of the detective quantum efficiency of a digital x-ray detector: comparison of three evaluations using a common image data set. , 2004, Medical physics.

[26]  Daniel R. Bednarek,et al.  Component analysis of a new solid state x-ray image intensifier (SSXII) using photon transfer and instrumentation noise equivalent exposure (INEE) measurements , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[27]  P. Greer,et al.  Evaluation of an algorithm for the assessment of the MTF using an edge method. , 2000, Medical physics.