Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kido, S.
Right arrow Articles by Kato, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kido, S.
Right arrow Articles by Kato, H.

Radiology, Vol 194, 407-412, Copyright © 1995 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Clinical evaluation of pulmonary nodules with single-exposure dual- energy subtraction chest radiography with an iterative noise-reduction algorithm

S Kido, J Ikezoe, H Naito, J Arisawa, S Tamura, T Kozuka, W Ito, K Shimura and H Kato
Department of Radiology, Osaka University Medical School, Japan.

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical usefulness of the single-exposure dual- energy subtraction method with an iterative noise-reduction algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen radiologists read three sets of images from 44 patients: original computed radiographic images only, original computed radiographic images plus conventional bone-subtracted images, and original computed radiographic images plus iterative noise-reduced bone-subtracted images. Twenty-two patients had one or more (maximum, five) pulmonary nodules; 22 had no pulmonary nodules. Observer performance was evaluated by means of calculation of the average area under the alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic curves (A1). RESULTS: Compared with the original computed radiographic image only, detection of nodules was significantly better with both the original computed radiographic image plus iterative bone-subtracted image (A1 = 0.72 +/- 0.02 and 0.66 +/- 0.02, respectively; P = .01) and the original computed radiographic image plus conventional bone- subtracted image (A1 = 0.66 +/- 0.02 and 0.61 +/- 0.01, respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSION: The iterative noise-reduction algorithm is superior to conventional methods in detection of pulmonary nodules.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1995 by the Radiological Society of North America.