DIGITAL LUMINESCENCE RADIOGRAPHY AND CONVENTIONAL RADIOGRAPHY IN ABDOMINAL CONTRAST EXAMINATIONS

被引:0
|
作者
KRUG, B
HARNISCHMACHER, U
KRAHE, T
FISCHBACH, R
ALTENBURG, A
KRINGS, F
机构
[1] UNIV COLOGNE,DEPT MED DOCUMENTAT & STAT,D-50924 COLOGNE,GERMANY
[2] UNIV COLOGNE,DEPT SURG,D-50924 COLOGNE,GERMANY
关键词
ABDOMEN; RADIOGRAPHY; DIGITAL; COMPARATIVE INVESTIGATION;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
In 326 patients abdominal contrast radiographs were compared to digital luminescence radiographs (DLR) and conventional screen-film system ones. The digital exposure dose was 50% of the conventional. In DLR, 2 different types of postprocessed images were obtained from each data set. A display with low spatial frequency enhancement filtered to look like a conventional radiograph was compared to a display with high spatial frequency enhancement. Conventional and DLR images were evaluated randomly and separately by 4 radiologists by means of a questionnaire. DLR proved to be diagnostically equivalent to the conventional technique with the exception of a slightly diminished visibility of the mucosal pattern. High spatial frequency enhancement did not provide additional diagnostic information and should be dispensed with in abdominal examinations.
引用
收藏
页码:284 / 289
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Effect of digital radiography on emergency department radiographic examinations
    Ben Lee
    Junewick, Joseph
    Luttenton, Charles
    EMERGENCY RADIOLOGY, 2006, 12 (04) : 158 - 159
  • [32] DIGITAL IMAGE ENHANCING RADIOGRAPHY IN SKELETAL EXAMINATIONS WITH THE POLYTRON
    LANGER, R
    LANGER, M
    ZWICKER, C
    SCHOLZ, A
    RADIOLOGE, 1988, 28 (09): : 453 - 453
  • [33] Dose reduction in thorax radiography in simulated neonates with additional filtration and digital luminescence radiography
    Seifert, H
    Jesberger, HJ
    Schneider, G
    Rein, L
    Blass, G
    Limbach, HG
    Niewald, M
    Sitzmann, FC
    Kramann, B
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 1998, 39 (05) : 514 - 519
  • [34] Local reference dose evaluation in conventional radiography examinations in Iran
    Shandiz, M. Shirin
    Toossi, M. T. Bahreyni
    Farsi, S.
    Yaghobi, K.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 15 (02): : 303 - 310
  • [35] Equalized contrast display processing for digital radiography
    Höppner, S
    Maack, I
    Neitzel, U
    Stahl, M
    MEDICAL IMAGING 2002: VISUALIZATION, IMAGE-GUIDED PROCEDURES, AND DISPLAY, 2002, 4681 : 617 - 625
  • [36] PHOTOSTIMULABLE PHOSPHOR DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY OF THE EXTREMITIES - DIAGNOSTIC-ACCURACY COMPARED WITH CONVENTIONAL RADIOGRAPHY
    WILSON, AJ
    MANN, FA
    MURPHY, WA
    MONSEES, BS
    LINN, MR
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1991, 157 (03) : 533 - 538
  • [37] Direct digital radiography versus conventional radiography for estimation of canal length in curved canals
    Burger, CL
    Mork, TO
    Hutter, JW
    Nicoll, B
    JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, 1999, 25 (04) : 260 - 263
  • [38] Direct digital radiography versus conventional radiography for estimation of canal length in curved canals
    Mohtavipour, Seiedeh Tahereh
    Dalili, Zahra
    Azar, Nasim Gheshlaghi
    IMAGING SCIENCE IN DENTISTRY, 2011, 41 (01) : 7 - 10
  • [39] Direct digital radiography versus conventional radiography in primary tooth length determination.
    Sanabe, ME
    Sanos-Pinto, L
    Gonçalves, MA
    Basso, MD
    Cordeiro, R
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2003, 82 : 142 - 142
  • [40] SMALL OBJECT CONTRAST IN AMBER AND CONVENTIONAL CHEST RADIOGRAPHY
    CHOTAS, HG
    VANMETTER, RL
    JOHNSON, GA
    RAVIN, CE
    RADIOLOGY, 1991, 180 (03) : 853 - 859