방사선산업학회지 (Journal of Radiation Industry)

한국방사선산업학회 (Korean Society of Radiation Industry)
권호 표지

복부초음파 검사 시 탐촉자 압박에 따른 영상 화질 평가

Evaluation of Image Quality according to Pressure of Transducer during Abdominal Ultrasonography

  • 곽종길 (동신대학교 보건의료학과) ;
  • 박신의 (동신대학교 방사선학과) ;
  • 최남길 (동신대학교 방사선학과)
  • Kwak, Jong-Gil (Department of Public Health and Medicine, Dongshin University Graduate School) ;
  • Park, Shin-Eui (Department of Radiological Science, Dongshin University) ;
  • Choi, Nam-Gil (Department of Radiological Science, Dongshin University)
  • 투고 : 2018.06.25
  • 심사 : 2018.07.19
  • 발행 : 2018.09.30

⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Abdominal ultrasound images with or without compression of the transducers, before and after endoscopy, were evaluate SNR and CNR which showing good images of abdominal organs (centered on the pancreas) and the effect of reducing stomach, duodenum, and intestinal gas artifacts. Statistical analysis was performed using the non-parametric krukal-Wallis test comparisons between the presence or absence of compression and before and after endoscopy. The structural model of the triple batch method with the different number of experimenters was used for expected factors that will affect the response value (with or without compression, SNR or CNR, group). Between difference before and after endoscopy and SNR, CNR intergroup interactions were statistically significant. Scheffe's post test was used to compare the mean difference between groups, the response value of overweight was higher than that of the control group (phantom), and there was no difference between the other groups in the control group. CNR and SNR and intergroup interactions are similar to intergroup effect of overweight (NO) before endoscopy in responses to CNR and SNR were significant differences and other patients showed similar results to phantom. Before and after endoscopy of with or without compression, there was no difference between before and after endoscopy. The SNR and CNR values were higher than those of compression stress. Therefore it would considered necessary to apply pressure to improve the quality of the abdominal ultrasound image.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Chung JB, Chung DK, Kim DY, Han KH, Moon YM, Kang JK, Park IS, Choi HJ, Lee JT and Yoo HS. 1989. Percutaneous fine needle aspiration biopsy of pancreatic cancer guided by ultrasonography. Korean J. Intern. Med. 4(2): 125-129.
  2. Entrekin RR, Porter BA, Sillesen HH, Wong AD, Cooperberg PL and Fix CH. 2001. Real-time spatial compound imaging: Application to breast, vascular, and musculoskeletal ultrasound. Semin. Ultrasound CT. MR. 22(1):50-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-2171(01)90018-6
  3. Feldman MK, Katyal S and Blackwood MS. 2009. US artifacts. Radiographics 29(4):1179-1189. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.294085199
  4. Fikri MA, Ashraf FH and Peter C. 2011. Clinical ultrasound physics. J. Emerg. Trauma Shock 4(4):501-503. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-2700.86646
  5. Hangiandreou NJ. 2003. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents. Topics in US: B-mode US: Basic concepts and new technology. Radiographics 23(4):1019-1033. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.234035034
  6. Hettmansperger TP and McKean JW. 2011, Robust Nonparametric Statistical Methods, 2nd ed., Chapman-Hall, New York.
  7. Hocking RR. 1985. The Analysis of Linear Models, Monterey, California.
  8. Kim IB. 2012. Abdominal Ultrasound Basic Method. Korean J. Med. 83(2):161-169.
  9. Kim WH, Hahm KB, Moon YM, Kang JK, Park IS and Choi HJ. 1992. Gastric varices: diagnosis with duplex Doppler ultrasonography-a case report. Yonsei Med. J. 33(2):189-193.
  10. Kong CG, Choi NG, Jung MY, Song JN, Kim W and Han JB. 2017, Image Quality Evaluation of CsI:Tl and Gd2O2S Detectors in the Indirect-Conversion DR System. J. Korean Soc. Radiol. 11(1):27-35. https://doi.org/10.7742/jksr.2017.11.1.27
  11. Lee WR. 1984. Pancreatic ultrasonography. Clin. Gastroenterol. 13 (3):763-789.
  12. Park SE, Lee SH, Lee DJ, Kim KM, Park SB, Kim BT, Joo NS, Cho DY, Kim KN, Kim JH, Park YK, Lee JU and Lee DR. 2014. Abdominal Ultrasonography: Procedure and Training. Korean J. Fam. Pract. 4(1):28-37.
  13. Philips. 2001. Global image sharpness study, Philips-Ultrasound Scientifica, Inc.
  14. Philips. 2018. Sono CT-XREX Technology, Philips-Ultrasound.
  15. Whittingham TA. 2007. Medical diagnostic applications and sources. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 93(1-3):84-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2006.07.004
  16. Worrell JA, Drolshagen LF, Kelly TC, Hunton DW, Durmon GR and Fleischer AC. 1990. Graded compression ultrasound in the diagnosis of appendicitis. A comparison of diagnostic criteria. J. Ultrasound Med. 9(3):145-150.