Comparison of three different techniques for dual-energy subtraction imaging in digital radiography: A signal-to-noise analysis

21Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Dual-energy subtraction imaging techniques allow the tissue and bone structures in the patient to be visualized and studied in two separate images, thus removing the obscurity associated with overlapping of the two structures. In addition, they allow the subtraction image signals to be used for quantifying the tissue and bone thicknesses. Thus, capability for dual-energy subtraction imaging is often incorporated with new digital radiography systems. There are three different approaches to dual-energy image subtraction imaging techniques. Among them, the dual-kilovolt (peak) [kV(p)] and sandwich detector techniques have been two widely used approaches. A third approach is the single-kV(p) dual-filter technique, which allows some flexible control of the spectra while avoiding the technical complexity of kV(p) value switching in slitscan imaging. In this report, the noise properties associated with these three techniques are studied and compared by computing the noise variances in the subtraction image signals as a function of the kV(p) values and filter thicknesses. It was found that the dual-kVp technique results in the least noisy subtraction images, whereas the dual-filter technique results in slightly less noisy subtraction images than the sandwich detector technique. Following optimization of the kV(p) value and filter thicknesses, the dual-filter and sandwich detector techniques result in a noise level of approximately three and four times higher than that resulted from the dual-kV(p) technique, respectively. © 1992 Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shaw, C. C., & Gur, D. (1992). Comparison of three different techniques for dual-energy subtraction imaging in digital radiography: A signal-to-noise analysis. Journal of Digital Imaging, 5(4), 262–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03167808

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free