Digital luminescence radiography and conventional radiography in abdominal contrast examinations.
In 326 patients abdominal contrast radiographs were compared to digital luminescence radiographs (DLR) and conventional screen-film system ones. The digital exposure dose was 50% of the conventional. In DLR, 2 different types of postprocessed images were obtained from each data set. A display with low spatial frequency enhancement filtered to look like a conventional radiograph was compared to a display with high spatial frequency enhancement. Conventional and DLR images were evaluated randomly and separately by 4 radiologists by means of a questionnaire. DLR proved to be diagnostically equivalent to the conventional technique with the exception of a slightly diminished visibility of the mucosal pattern. High spatial frequency enhancement did not provide additional diagnostic information and should be dispensed with in abdominal examinations.
Krug
B
B
Department of Radiology, University of Cologne, Germany.
Harnischmacher
U
U
Krahe
T
T
Fischbach
R
R
Altenburg
A
A
Krings
F
F
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001466:Barium Sulfate; D002765:Cholecystography; D003287:Contrast Media; D003626:Data Display; D004064:Digestive System / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D005260:Female; D005471:Fluoroscopy; D006801:Humans; D008163:Luminescent Measurements; D008220:Lymphography; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015588:Observer Variation; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011829:Radiation Dosage; D011856:Radiographic Image Enhancement / Q000379:methods; D011860:Radiography, Abdominal; D014567:Urography; D014963:X-Ray Intensifying Screens
D003287:Contrast Media; D001466:Barium Sulfate