Keywords:
Lung, Digital radiography, Diagnostic procedure, Technology assessment, Cancer, Chronic obstructive airways disease
Authors:
N. Hashimoto1, H. Machida1, K. Yamashita1, T. NAKAI1, J. Yamaguchi1, J. Shudo1, A. Nakanishi1, H. Takeuchi2, K. Yokoyama1; 16-20-2 Shinkawa, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo/JP, 23-1-24 Matsuyama, Kiyose-shi, Tokyo/JP
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2021/C-11291
Results
Quantitative evaluation of blurring and ghost artifact
Blurring percentages based on the FWHM at both 20 and 30 rpm were less than 1% at all the pulse widths and comparable among the different pulse widths (Table 2). Blurring percentages based on the area was 10.0% at 30 rpm and pulse width of 8 msec (Figure 15) but less than 5% with other combinations of the rotation speed and pulse width (Table 3). Ghost artifact percentages at the first to tenth frame at both 20 and 30 rpm were comparable among the different pulse widths whereas the percentages were all greater than 10% at the first frame, approximately 2% at the second frame, and less than 1% at the third to tenth frame (Figure 16).
Qualitative evaluation of nodule visibility
The averaged visibility scores of the solid nodule in/on all the anatomies at both 20 and 30 rpm were all 3.0 ± 0.0 and comparable among the different pulse widths (P = 1.000) (Table 4). The scores of the ground-glass nodule in/on all the anatomies at both 20 and 30 rpm were also comparable among the different pulse widths (P = 0.392-1.000) (Table 5).
Quantitative evaluation of diaphragmatic movement
The averaged maximum diaphragmatic movements were comparable among the different pulse widths and their differences were all less than 3 mm and 3% (Table 6, Figure 17, Figure 18).