• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>Conference on Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment >Do quantitative metrics derived from standard fluoroscopy phantoms used for quality control assess vendor-specific advancements in interventional fluoroscopy systems?
【24h】

Do quantitative metrics derived from standard fluoroscopy phantoms used for quality control assess vendor-specific advancements in interventional fluoroscopy systems?

机译：从用于质量控制的标准荧光透视模型中得出的定量指标是否可以评估介入荧光透视系统中特定于供应商的进步？

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Approximately 9 million fluoroscopically-guided interventional procedures are performed annually in the USA. Recent technological advancements for interventional fluoroscopy systems have focused towards vendor-specific realtime image and signal processing. Hence, the purpose of this study was to evaluate if quantitative metrics derived from standard image quality phantoms, routinely used for quality control, are able to distinguish vendor-specific processing features for interventional fluoroscopy systems. Six standard image quality phantoms were used to measure contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), full-width-at-half-maximum (for determining edge blurring) and modulation transfer function, to analyze contrast detail characteristics, and to assess digital subtraction angiography (DSA) performance of six flat-panel detector based interventional fluoroscopy systems from Philips (with and without ClaritylQ) and Siemens. Phantom data were acquired at different dose modes and field-of-view settings. Fluoroscopy loops and digital subtraction acquisitions were saved (duration 3 seconds; repeated 3 times). Images were analyzed off-line using ImageJ. CNR measurements showed no differences between systems, whereas the contrast-detail analysis and edge blurring characterization showed relatively low performance of Philips Clarity systems compared to Siemens and Philips non-Clarity systems. Conversely, the modulation transfer function showed that the limiting spatial resolution was higher for the Philips systems relative to the Siemens suite. However, with the DSA phantom the performance of Siemens and Philips Clarity-systems was similar. In conclusion, depending on the image quality phantom used for comparing different systems, the results may differ and therefore, quantitative metrics derived from standard fluoroscopy phantoms lack the discriminatory ability to assess vendor-specific advancements in interventional fluoroscopy systems.
机译：在美国，每年约有900万例经荧光镜引导的介入手术。介入荧光透视系统的最新技术进步已集中于特定于供应商的实时图像和信号处理。因此，本研究的目的是评估常规用于质量控制的标准图像质量体模得出的量化指标是否能够区分介入荧光检查系统的特定于供应商的处理功能。使用六个标准图像质量体模来测量对比度-噪声比（CNR），半峰全宽（用于确定边缘模糊）和调制传递函数，以分析对比度细节特征并评估数字减法飞利浦（带或不带ClaritylQ）和西门子的六个基于平板探测器的介入荧光检查系统的血管造影（DSA）性能。在不同的剂量模式和视野设置下获取幻像数据。保存了透视检查循环和数字减法采集（持续时间3秒；重复3次）。使用ImageJ离线分析图像。 CNR测量结果表明系统之间没有差异，而对比细节分析和边缘模糊特征表明，与西门子和飞利浦非清晰度系统相比，飞利浦清晰度系统的性能相对较低。相反，调制传递函数表明，与西门子套件相比，飞利浦系统的极限空间分辨率更高。但是，使用DSA幻像，西门子和飞利浦Clarity系统的性能相似。总之，取决于用于比较不同系统的图像质量体模，结果可能会有所不同，因此，从标准荧光透视体模派生的定量指标缺乏评估介入荧光透视系统中供应商特定进步的区分能力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号