• 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：是否来自用于质量控制的标准荧光透视幻像的定量指标评估介入荧光透视系统中的供应商特异性进步？

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：约900万荧光透视引导下介入手术在美国每年进行。介入透视系统最新的技术进步已经集中对特定供应商的实时图像和信号处理。因此，本研究的目的是评估如果从标准图像质量模体，常规地用于质量控制衍生定量的度量，是能够区分供应商特定的处理功能用于介入透视系统。六个标准图像质量幻影用于测量对比度噪声比（CNR），全宽在半最大值（用于确定边缘模糊）和调制传递函数，来分析对比度细节的特性，并评估数字减影血管造影（DSA）从飞利浦（有和没有ClaritylQ）和西门子6平板探测器基于介入透视系统的性能。幻影数据是在不同的剂量模式和场的视图设置获得的。透视循环和数字减影收购被保存（持续时间3秒;重复3次）。使用ImageJ图像进行离线分析。 CNR测量显示系统之间没有差别，而对比度细节分析和边缘模糊表征显示飞利浦清晰度系统的相对低的性能相比西门子和飞利浦非净度系统。相反，调制传递函数表明，限制空间分辨率为用于相对于所述西门子套件飞利​​浦系统更高。然而，随着DSA幻影西门子和飞利浦清晰，系统的性能是相似的。总之，根据用于比较不同的系统中的图像质量幻像，结果可能不同，因此，从标准透视幻影衍生定量的度量缺乏评估介入透视系统供应商特定的进步的判别能力。

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