Journal of radiological science and technology (대한방사선기술학회지:방사선기술과학)

Korean Society of Radiological Science (대한방사선과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of Angle Optimization on Edge Test Device Setting in Modulation Transfer Function

변조전달함수 방법에서 엣지 장치 설정에 대한 각도 최적화 평가

  • Min, Jung-Whan (Department of Radiological technology, Shingu University) ;
  • Jeong, Hoi-Woun (Department of Radiological Science, Baekseok Culture University)
  • Received : 2019.12.30
  • Accepted : 2020.02.26
  • Published : 2020.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study was purpose to evaluation of Modulation Transfer Function in Measurements by using the International electrotechnical commission standard(IEC 62220-1) which were edge device each angle by using edge method. In this study was Aero(Konica, Japan) image receptor which is a indirect Flat panel detector(FPD) was used. The size of matrix 1994 × 2430 (14"× 17" inch) which performed 12 bit processing and pixel pitch is 175 ㎛. The results of shown as MTF measurements at IEC standard. The amount of data seemed reasonable and at an MTF value of 0.1 the spatial frequencies were 2.56 cycles/mm at an angle of 2.4°. MTF value of 0.5 the spatial frequencies were 1.32 cycles/mm at an angle of 2.4°. This study were to evaluate MTF by setting each angle 2.0°~2.8° degrees the most effective optimal edge angle and to suggest the quantitative methods of measuring by using IEC.

Keywords

References

  1. Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Performance characteristic of a CsI(Tl) flat panel detector radiography system. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2012;35(2):109-17.
  2. Jeong HW, Min JW, Kim JM, et al. Investigation of physical imaging properties in various digital radiography system. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2017;40(3):363-70. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2017.40.3.02
  3. Min JW, Jeong HW. Comparison of modulation transfer function in measurements by using edge device angle in indirect digital radiography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2019;42(4):259-63. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2019.42.4.259
  4. IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) 62220-1. Medical electrical equipment Characteristics of digital X-ray imaging devices Part 1: determination of the detective quantum efficiency. Geneva; 2003.
  5. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the modulation transfer function for computed tomography by using American association physics medicine phantom. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(2):193-8. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2016.39.2.09
  6. Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Evaluation of image quality for various electronic portal imaging devices in radiation therapy. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):451-61. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.4.16
  7. Fujita H, Tasai DY, Itoh T, et al. A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1992;11(1):34-9. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.126908
  8. Samei E, Flynn MJ, Reimann DA, et al. A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device. Medical Physics. 1998;25:102. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598165
  9. Greer PB, van Doorn T. Evaluation of an algorithm for the assessment of the MTF using an edge method. Medical Physics. 2000;27:2048. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1288682
  10. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Evaluation of the performance characteristic for mammography by using edge device. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2016;39(3):415-20. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2016.39.3.16
  11. Kim KW, Jeong HW, Min JW, et al. Measurement of image quality according to the time of computed radiography system. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2015;38(4):365-74. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2015.38.4.05
  12. Granfors PR, Aufrichtig R. Performance of a $41{\times}41cm^2$ amorphous silicon flat panel X-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications. Med Phys. 2000;27(6):1324-33. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.599010
  13. Antonuk LE, Boudry J, Huang W. et al. Demonstration of megavoltage and diagnostic X-ray imaging with hydrogenated amorphous silicon arrays. Med Phys. 1992;19(6):1455-66. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596802
  14. Finc C, Hallscheidt PJ, Noeldge G. Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;178(2):481-6.
  15. Bacher K, Smeets P, Bonnarens K. et al. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(4):923-9. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.181.4.1810923
  16. Min JW, Jeong HW, Kim KW, et al. Comparison of noise power spectrum in measurements by using international electro-technical commission standard devices in indirect digital radiography. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2018;41(5):457-62. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2018.41.5.457
  17. Min JW, Jeong HW, Han JH, et al. Study on the physical imaging characteristics by using magnetic resonance imaging 1.5T. Journal of Radiological Science and Technology. 2019;42(5):329-34. https://doi.org/10.17946/JRST.2019.42.5.329